T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. MANU E L HE R R E R A- OS ORNI O, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 10044 D . C . N o. 2: 08 -c r- 00 45 4-JA M -4 ME MOR AN DU M *

UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. SI XTO PAD I LL A- GO M EZ , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 10174 D . C . N o. 2: 08 -c r- 00 45 4-JA M -7

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia J ohn A . M e nde z , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 12, 2013 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia 

# FI LED MA R 28 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSB e c au s e th e p a rt i e s a r e f a m i l i a rwi th th e f

a c t s a n d p r o c e d u r a l h i s t o ry , we 1 r e s t a t e the m he r e onl y a s ne c e s s a ryt o e xpl a i n ourde c i s i on. 2 B efo re: F IS H E R , C A L L A H A N , an d N G U Y E N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lla n ts S ix to P a d illa - G o m e z a n d M a n u e l H e rr e r a - O s o rn io ap p e a l th e irc o n v ic tio n s f o r( 1 ) c o n s p ir a c yto d is tr ib u te a n d p o s s e s s w ith in te n t to di stri bu t e over 100 ki l og ra m s of m ar i j uana, i n v i ol at i on of 21 U . S . C . §§ 84 1(a) (1), 846; ( 2) know i ngl y a nd i nt e nt i ona l l ypos s e s s i ng w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e ove r100 ki l ogr a m s of

m a r i j ua na , i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) a nd 18 U . S . C . § 2; and (3) kn ow i ng l y posse ss i ng fi re arm s i n furtherance of a drug tra ff i cki ng offe nse, i n v i o l at i o n o f 1 8 U . S . C . § 9 2 4 (c)(1 ) an d 1 8 U . S . C . § 2 . H errera-O so rn i o al so appeal s hi s c on vi ct i on s f or kn ow i ng l y and i nt ent i on al l y di stri bu t i ng a s m al l er qua nt i ty of

m a r i j ua na , i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) a nd 18 U . S . C . § 2, a nd m a nuf a c tur i ng ove r1, 000 m a r i j ua napl a nt s , i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) a nd 18 U . S . C . § 2. H e rr e r a - O s orni o a l s o appe a l s hi s s e nt e nc e . W e ha ve j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n tt o 8 U . S. C. § 3 7 4 2 ( a ) a n d 2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f i rm. 1 1. T h e r e is s u f

f ic ie n t e v id e n c e to s u s ta in th e g u iltyv e r d ic ts f o rb o th de f e nda nt s on a l l c ount s . “ [ T ] he r e l e va ntque s t i on i s w he the r , a f t e rvi e w i ng the e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e p r o s e c u tio n , anyra t i on al tri erof fa ct3

coul d h ave f

ou nd the es se nt i al el em ent s of the cr i m e bey on d a re as on abl e dou bt . ” J a c k s o n v . V ir g in ia , 44 3 U . S . 30 7, 31 9 (19 79 ). T here i s am pl e e vi dence thatP adi l l a- G om ez and H erre ra -O sorni o w er e c onne c t e d t o the c ons pi r a c y t o s e l l m a r i j ua na , a nd tha tthe ypos s e s s e d m a r i j ua na w ith in te n t to s e ll, u n d e re ith e rc o - c o n s p ir a to ra n d /o ra id in g - a n d - ab e ttin g th e o r ie s . S pe c i f i c a l l y , P a di l l a - G om e z w a s s e e n a tthr e e ke ypoi nt s dur i ng the da yof the S ept em ber 4, 20 08 , transac t i on , and h e a ct ed i n a m anner consi st entw i th cou nt er s u rv e i l l a n c e d u r i n g th e tr a n s a c t i o n . H e l i v e d i n Ta f t , Ca l i f o rn i a , n e a rw h e r e s o me of the m a r i j ua naw oul d be c om i ng f r om . A na r c ot i c s dog a l e rt e d t o hi s truc k, w hi c h s m e l l e d s tr ongl y of de odor i z e r s a nd, a c c or di ng t o one i nve s t i ga t i ng a ge nt , of m ar i j uana. H erre ra -O sorni o al so ac t ed i n a m anner consi st entw i th cou nt er survei l l ance du ri ng the S ept em ber 4 transac t i on . H erre ra -O sorni o h ad been see n b e f o r e a t ap r io rm a r iju a n as a le , w h e r e a g a in h e a c te d in am a n n e rc o n s is te n t w ith bei ng a l oo ko ut , atthe m ar i j uana grow si t e, and atco-c on spi ra t or F el i x G ar ci aV al dez’ s r es i dence af

t erl ea vi ng the grow si t e. B oth d ef endant s, m oreover, w er e desc ri bed as “ [s ] t art l ed, ” “ furt i ve, ” “ nervou s” and “ subm i ss i ve” w hen they w er e arre st ed atthe S ept em ber 4 transac t i on . S uch ci rc um st ant i al evi dence w as s uf f i c i e ntf orar a t i ona l tr i e rof

f a c tt o f i nd tha tthe de f

e nda nt s w e r e gui l tyof

the c h a r g e s a g a in s t th e m . Se e J ac k s on , 4 4 3 U .S . a t 3 1 9 ; se e al so U ni ted Stat es v.T he ca se s the defendant s c i t e i nv ol ved m uch w ea ker e vi dence of a 2 c o n n e c tio n to th e c o n s p ir a c y . Se e, e . g. , U ni ted Stat es v. L op ez , 625 F . 2d 889, 896 (9th C i r. 19 82 ) ( no evi dence thatthe defendant , w ho had n everbeen se en before hi s a rr e s t , pa rt i c i pa t e d i n a ny ne got i a t i ons c onc e rni ng, orde l i ve ryof , he r oi n, or th a t h e r o in w a s e v e rd is c u s s e d in h is p r e s e n c e ) ; U ni te d State s v . P e nagos , 823 F . 2d 34 6, 34 9 (9th C i r. 19 87 ) ( po l i ce saw the defendantengage i n al l eged coun t er s urve i l l a nc e a c t i vi t i e s onl y onc e , notdur i ng adrug s a l e ortr a ns f e r , a nd w i thout f oc us i ng on “ a ny pa rt i c ul a rpe r s ons ora c t i vi t i e s ” tha tal ookoutw oul d be in te r e s te d in ) . 4 Min c o ff , 5 7 4 F .3 d 1 1 8 6 , 1 1 9 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) ; U ni ted Stat es v. H

erre ra-G on zalez , 26 3 F . 3d 10 92 , 10 95 (9th C i r. 20 01 ). 2 T he e vi de nc e w i th r e s pe c tt o the 18 U . S . C . § 924( c ) f i r e a rm e nha nc e m e nt al so w as suff

i ci ent , gi ven thatthe go vernm entneeded t o p rove on l y thati tw as f o r e s e e ab le th a t th e d e f

e n d a n ts ’ c o - c o n s p ir a to r s w o u ld b r in g o n e o rm o r e g u n s to th e S e p te m b e r4 tr a n s a c tio n , n o t th a t th e d e f e n d a n ts k n e w th e g u n s w e r e th e r e . See P i nker ton v. U

ni ted Stat es , 3 2 8 U .S . 6 4 0 , 6 4 7 ( 1 9 4 6 ) ; U n i ted S ta tes v. A lva rezV a le n z u e la , 231 F . 3d 1198, 1203 ( 9th C i r . 2000) . O ne a ge ntt e s t i f i e d tha tthe l i ke l i hood of

guns be i ng pr e s e ntdur i ng adrug de a l i nc r e a s e d w i th the s i z e of the deal , a f ac tre l evantt o the 32 6-po un d, $5 00 , 00 0 sal e a ti ss ue here. T w o g un s w er e brou gh tt o the transac t i on ; ea ch w as i n the back seatof a di ff er enttruck, w here H e rr e r a - O s o rn io a n d a n o th e rc o - c o n s p ir a to rw e r e s e a te d , a n d a t le a s t th e g u n in on e truck w as re adi l y a cc es si bl e, covered onl y by at -s hi rt . P adi l l a- G om ez previ ou sl y had been i nv ol ved i n a m ar i j uana op er at i on i n w hi ch a gun w as5

di sc ov er ed. T he fa ctthatthe gu ns w er e unl oaded w as no tdi sposi t i ve, si nce they s till c o u ld b e u s e d f

o rin tim id a tio n . See U

ni ted Stat es v. B ai ley , 516 U . S . 137, 14 8-50 (199 5), supers eded by statut e as s tat ed i n A bb ot t v. U ni ted Stat es , 1 3 1 S. C t. 1 8 , 2 0 ( 2 0 1 0 ) . 2. T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n d enyi ng P adi l l aG o m e z ’s m o tio n to e x c lu d e th e e v id e n c e th a t an a r c o tic s d e te c tio n d o g a le rte d to P a di l l a - G om e z ’ s truc k f ol l ow i ng the S e pt e m be r4 tr a ns a c t i on a nd bus t . F i r s t , the m ot i on w as un t i m el y bec ause the go vernm entprod uced enou gh i nform at i on before tr ia l to n o tif

y P a d illa - G o m e z th a t it m ig h t tryto c o n n e c t th e d o g s n if f to h is tru c k . S e c o n d , c o n tr a ryto P a d illa - G o m e z ’s a r g u m e n t, d o g s n if f s d o n o t n e c e s s a r ily tri gg erthe expertdi sc l osure r equi re m ent s of F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 16 or re qu i re the di stri ctcourtt o con du cta r el i abi l i ty i nq ui ryun derD au bert v. Merre l l D ow P ha rm aceut i cal

s, Inc. , 5 0 9 U .S . 5 7 9 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . See Flo r ida v . H a rr is , -- U . S . -- , 13 3 S . C t . 10 50 , 10 57 –5 8 (20 13 ) ( re j ec t i ng any r equi re m entfor adet ai l ed c h e c k lis t o f

p r o o f o f r e liab ilityo rs p e c ia l p r o c e d u r e s f o rd o g s n if

f s in p r o b ab le c au s e h e a r in g s ) ; Il l i no is v . Cab al les , 54 3 U . S . 40 5, 40 9 (20 05 ) ( di sc ussi ng tri al court s’ generalabi l i ty t o ass es s the re l i abi l i ty of dog sni ff s) . T hi rd, the do g sni ff e v id e n c e in th is c a s e w a s r e liab le , a n d P a d illa - G o m e z h a d a m p le o p p o rtu n ityto s u b je c t th e d o g ’s h a n d le rto v o ird ir e a n d c r o s s - e x a m in a tio n . See H a rr is , 1 3 3 S.6

C t. a t 1 0 5 7 ; U

ni te d State s v . C urr e nc

y, U . S. $42, 500. 00 , 2 8 3 F .3 d 9 7 7 , 9 8 2 ( 9 th C i r. 20 02 ). F i nal l y, any e rr or i n adm i tt i ng the evi dence concerni ng the do g sni ff w as harm l es s bec ause i tw as cum ul at i ve of other e vi dence i m pl i ca t i ng P adi l l aG o m e z in th e c o n s p ir a c y . U n i ted S ta tes v. L i era , 58 5 F . 3d 12 37 , 12 44 (9th C i r. 20 09 ). 3. T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n a dm i tt i ng e vi de nc e of P a d illa - G o m e z ’s p r io rc o n v ic tio n u n d e rF e d e r a l R u le s o f E v id e n c e 4 0 4 ( b ) a n d 4 0 3 . R ul e 404 (b) prohi bi t s a dm i tt i ng evi dence of pri or bad act s t o p rove cri m i nal p r o p e n s ity , b u t a llo w s a d m is s io n to p r o v e “m o tiv e , o p p o rtu n ity , in te n t, preparat i on , pl an, kn ow l edge, i dent i ty or absence of m i st ake, or l ac k o f a cc i dent . ” F e d . R . E v id . R . 4 0 4 ( b ) ( 1 )

– ( 2 ) ; s e e a ls o U n ite d S ta te s v . Ca s tillo , 181 F . 3d 1129, 11 34 (9th C i r. 19 99 ) ( expl ai ni ng thatR ul e 404 (b) i s a“ rul e of i ncl usi on , ” i . e. , un l es s apri or bad actt ends t o p rove o n lyp r o p e n s ity , it is a d m is s ib le ) . E vi de nc e c onc e rni ng P a di l l a - G om e z ’ s i nvol ve m e nti n 2005 i n am a r i j ua na gr ow i ng ope r a t i on t e nde d t o pr ove hi s i nt e nt( t o m a ke m one yf r om the i l l e ga l drug tr a de ) a nd hi s know l e dge of m a r i j ua naope r a t i ons , a nd t o di s pr ove hi s c l a i m tha the w a s m e r e lyp r e s e n t d u r in g th e S e p te m b e r4 tr a n s a c tio n b yc o in c id e n c e . A cco rd i n g l y, th e p ri o r co n d u ctt en d ed t o p ro v e a m at eri al el em en to f th e ch arg es, w as suff i ci ent l y s i m i l art o the offens e c harged, w as base d o n suffi ci entevi dence,7

a n d w a s n o t to o r e m o te in tim e . U ni ted Stat es v. R am i rez- R ob les , 386 F . 3d 1234, 1242 ( 9th C i r . 2004) . T he f a c ttha tar i f

l e w a s f ound a tthe pr i orm a r i

j ua na op er at i on “ t end[ed] t o m ake the exi st ence of the defendant ’ s kno w l edge”— that fi re arm s are used t o g uard si gn i fi cantm ar i j uana op er at i on s, and thata f i re arm m i ghtbe br oughtt o the S e pt e m be r4 tr a ns a c t i on— “ m or e pr obabl e tha n i tw oul d be w i tho utthe evi dence. ” Un i te d S ta te s v . Vo , 413 F . 3d 1010, 1018 ( 9th C i r . 2005) (quo t at i on m arks om i tt ed). F i nal l y, the di stri ctcourt ’ s l i m i t i ng i nstruct i on re du ce d a ny r i s k of

undue pr e

j udi c e unde rR ul e 403. 4. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y s ent ence d H erre ra -O sorni o. T he di stri ct c ourtc a l c ul a t e d H e rr e r a - O s orni o’ s of f e ns e l e ve l ba s e d on hi s r e s pons i bi l i tyf or roug hl y 4, 20 0 m ar i

j uana pl ant s and hi s s up ervi soryrol e a tthe m ar i j uana grow si t e, b o th o f w h ic h th e g o v e rn m e n t h a d to p r o v e b yap r e p o n d e r a n c e o f th e e v id e n c e . See U .S .S .G . § § 2 D 1 .1 ( a ) , ( c ) ( 6 ) , 3 B 1 .1 ( b ) ; U ni te d State s v . M

aldonado , 215 F . 3d 1 0 4 6 , 1 0 5 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ; U ni te d States v . H

arr is on- P hi l

pot , 978 F . 2d 1520, 15 23 (9th C i r. 19 92 ). H e r e , s uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e s upport e d the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s f i ndi ngs . T he i nve s t i ga t i ng a ge nt s c ount e d ove r2, 200 pl a nt s i n j us tport i ons of the gr ow s i t e a nd e s tim a te d b a s e d o n th e ire x p e r ie n c e th a t th e r e w e r e o v e r4 ,2 0 0 p la n ts . T h is es t i m at e w as consi st entw i th st at em ent s m ade by c o-conspi ra t or F el i x G ar ci a-8

V a ld e z a n d th e a g e n ts ’ r e p o rts . R e g a r d in g H e rr e r a - O s o rn io ’s s u p e rv is o ryr o le , h is c o - c o n s p ir a to r s e x p la in e d th a t h e w a s p r im a r ilyr e s p o n s ib le f o rth e g r o w s ite . T hese st at em ent s w er e ver i fi ed by “ extri nsi c c orrobo ra t i ng evi dence, ” U ni ted State s v . E

gge , 2 2 3 F .3 d 1 1 2 8 , 1 1 3 2 (9 th C ir. 2 0 0 0 ), in clu d in g H erre ra -O so rn io ’s e a r l i e rpr e s e nc e a tthe gr ow s i t e a nd the a rr e s tof tw o m i nor s a tthe s i t e f ol l ow i ng the S ept em ber 4 transac t i on and b ust . T hi s w as suff i ci entevi dence thatH erre ra O s orni o ha d r e s pons i bi l i ty ove rthe pr ope rtyora c t i vi t i e s of the c ons pi r a c y , a nd/ or c o n tr o l o v e ro th e r s . See U .S .S .G . § 3 B 1 .1 ( b ) & A p p . N o te s 2 , 4 ; U ni ted Stat es v. R i ley , 3 3 5 F .3 d 9 1 9 , 9 2 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . F i nal l y, the di stri ctcourtadequat el y c on si dere d the 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) s e n te n c in g f

a c to r s , in c lu d in g : th e e x te n t o f H e rr e r a - O s o rn io ’s in v o lv e m e n t; h is l acko f co n tro l o v er th e m i n o rs atth e g ro w si t e; h i s refu sal t o accep tresp o n si b i l i ty; h is la c ko f

c r im in a l h is to ry ; th e p o s s ib ilityo f s e n te n c in g d is p a r itie s v is - à - v is h is co -d efen d an t s; an d h i s fam i l y ci rcu m st an ces. A FFI R M ED .