The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District

1

Judge for the District of Minnesota.

___________

No. 96-1006

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Jose Maria Saenz, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: June 10, 1996

 Filed: September 9, 1996

___________

Before BOWMAN, LAY, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jose Maria Saenz was convicted by a jury of one count of conspiring

to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994) and one

count of aiding and abetting the possession of marijuana with an intent to

distribute in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The

District Court sentenced Saenz to two concurrent terms of sixty months in 1

prison and five years of supervised release. The court also imposed a

special assessment of $100. Saenz appeals from his convictions, and we

affirm.

The sole argument Saenz raises on appeal is that the government

failed to introduce sufficient evidence to convict him. "We will reverse

a conviction for insufficient evidence . . . only if no construction of the

evidence exists to support the jury's
-2-

verdict." United States v. Darden, 70 F.3d 1507, 1517 (8th Cir. 1995),

cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 1449, 2567 (1996). We view "the evidence in the

light most favorable to the guilty verdict, giving the government the

benefit of all reasonable inferences that might be drawn from the

evidence." Id. (quoted cases omitted).

In the summer of 1994, Gerald Mixon arranged for substantial amounts

of marijuana to be delivered to Chris Hamilton. Hamilton and his

associates then transported the marijuana to Minnesota for Mixon. Hamilton

was arrested in October 1994, and he agreed to cooperate with the

government. At the time, Hamilton was arranging to buy a large amount of

marijuana from Mixon. Based on information obtained from Hamilton, law

enforcement officers learned that Nevlyn Prothro, an associate of Mixon,

was planning to drive a motor home to Texas to obtain a half ton of

marijuana. Documents later seized from Mixon and Saenz showed that in midOctober Mixon and Saenz were in McAllen, Texas, on the border between the

United States and Mexico, and that Saenz had wired money to Mexico on

October 12 and October 19. Apparently, the marijuana was not available,

and Prothro and Mixon drove the motor home to Chicago. Prothro, who pled

guilty to conspiring to distribute marijuana and possess marijuana with

intent to distribute, cooperated with the government and testified that

Saenz flew ahead to Chicago where he was to show a potential customer some

cocaine. That customer's name was Nick Wrigley, and Saenz's calendar

indicates that he had a meeting with "Nick" on October 25 in Chicago. When

Mixon and Prothro arrived in Chicago, they met with Saenz and discussed the

meeting with Wrigley. One of Mixon's associates apparently had delivered

marijuana to Saenz rather than cocaine. Prothro testified that Saenz

reported that he had shown Wrigley the marijuana, but Wrigley was not

interested. While in Chicago, Saenz also drove with Prothro when he

delivered a ten-pound sample of marijuana to a customer. 
-3-

Law enforcement officers in Minnesota arranged an undercover

marijuana buy in November 1994. In connection with the undercover

operation, Saenz was confronted by officers in a hotel lobby while he was

trying to check out of the hotel. He had told the clerk that he was

checking out of room 218. A search of room 218 yielded a great deal of

evidence, including a digital pager, Saenz's address book, Saenz's airline

itinerary for his October 25 flight to Chicago, a receipt for a rental

truck, and the key to a lock that secured the rear door on a rental truck

that was in the parking lot of the hotel. Pursuant to a warrant, officers

searched the rental truck and seized 242 pounds of marijuana. In the cab

of the rental truck, officers found an unopened package of tape with

Saenz's fingerprints on it.

The evidence set out above is just a taste of the evidence against

Saenz that the government presented at his trial. We find there is

substantial evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Saenz

conspired with Gerald Mixon and others to distribute marijuana. A

reasonable jury also could find that he aided and abetted the possession

of marijuana with the intent to distribute.

Despite the overwhelming evidence of Saenz's participation in the

conspiracy, Saenz claims that he was merely "the driver and general `errand

boy' for Mixon." Appellant's Brief at 16. Saenz also claims that while

the government established Saenz's presence at the scene of the crime it

failed to establish any knowledge or participation on his part. Id. at 20.

The jury, however, did not accept these arguments and returned guilty

verdicts against Saenz. There was substantial evidence, including direct

testimony, that established Saenz's knowledge of the marijuana possession

and distribution activities engaged in by his co-conspirators. The

evidence also is sufficient to show that Saenz knew that his actions aided

the illegal activities of his co-conspirators. Based on the evidence

presented at trial, we cannot say that "no
-4-

construction of the evidence exists to support the jury's verdict," Darden,

70 F.3d at 1517. The convictions are therefore affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.