United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 22-50199

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Arnulfo Antonio Rosales Hernandez, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:21-CR-729-1

Before King, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges:

Stephen A. Higginson, Circuit Judge:*

Arnulfo Antonio Rosales Hernandez was charged with possessing 500 

grams or more of a methamphetamine mixture with intent to distribute and 

importing 500 grams or more of a methamphetamine mixture. After a threeday trial, a jury convicted Rosales Hernandez of the importation offense and 

acquitted him on the possession charge. On appeal, he challenges the 

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 16, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-50199 Document: 00516581178 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/16/2022
No. 22-50199

2

sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, as well as the jury’s split 

verdict. For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM Rosales Hernandez’s 

conviction and sentence.

Because Rosales Hernandez moved for judgment of acquittal at the 

close of the government’s case but failed to renew his motion at the close of 

evidence or after the verdict, we review his sufficiency challenge for plain 

error. See United States v. Cabello, 33 F.4th 281, 285 (5th Cir. 2022); United

States v. Oti, 872 F.3d 678, 686 (5th Cir. 2017); United States v. McIntosh, 280 

F.3d 479, 483 (5th Cir. 2002). In the context of a sufficiency challenge, we 

will reverse for plain error “only if there is a manifest miscarriage of justice,” 

meaning that “the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt or the 

evidence is so tenuous that a conviction is shocking.” Oti, 872 F.3d at 686 

(cleaned up).

To establish the offense of importation of methamphetamine, the 

government had to prove: “(1) the defendant played a role in bringing a 

quantity of a controlled substance into the United States from outside of the 

country; (2) the defendant knew the substance was controlled; and (3) the 

defendant knew the substance would enter the United States.” United States 

v. Lopez-Monzon, 850 F.3d 202, 206 (5th Cir. 2017) (cleaned up). Rosales 

Hernandez challenges only the knowledge element of his conviction, arguing 

that the government failed to introduce sufficient evidence that he knew that

the vehicle he drove across the border contained methamphetamine in a 

hidden compartment. 

Ordinarily, control over a vehicle that contains contraband can 

support an inference of knowledge of the contraband. See United States v. 

Mendoza, 522 F.3d 482, 489 (5th Cir. 2008). But when contraband is 

concealed, additional circumstantial evidence “that is suspicious in nature or 

demonstrates guilty knowledge” is required. Id. (citation omitted). 

Case: 22-50199 Document: 00516581178 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/16/2022
No. 22-50199

3

The record is not “devoid” of circumstantial evidence from which a 

reasonable jury could infer Rosales Hernandez’s knowledge of the concealed 

methamphetamine, nor is that evidence “so tenuous” that his conviction is 

“shocking.” Oti, 872 F.3d at 686 (cleaned up). The Border Patrol Officer 

who spoke with Rosales Hernandez during the primary vehicle inspection 

testified at trial that Rosales Hernandez told him that the vehicle belonged to 

“his friend named Carlos,” that “Carlos lent it to him because [Rosales 

Hernandez’s] truck had broke[n] down, and [that] he [had] been driving it . . 

. about a month.” Yet the car “appeared to be sterile,” with “no trash, no 

food, no wrappers, [and] no drinks” in it. In addition, the jury heard 

testimony that Rosales Hernandez stared at the X-ray machine used to scan 

vehicles for contraband during the secondary inspection of his vehicle, and 

that he acted nervously during a later law enforcement interview. 

During the subsequent interview, which was published to the jury,

Rosales Hernandez contradicted his earlier story and said that he got the car 

from a woman named Sophia who employed him to bring merchandise and 

cash between Mexico and Dallas. But his account of how he did business 

with Sophia was implausible. He told the law enforcement officer that when 

he arrived in Dallas, he called Sophia, and Sophia’s men would take the car 

from him to load bags of clothing or merchandise into it for an hour or an 

hour and a half.

Moreover, “[a] jury may infer a defendant’s guilty knowledge based 

on the quantity of drugs, as long as other evidence supports the inference.” 

United States v. Garcia-Flores, 246 F.3d 451, 455 (5th Cir. 2001). Here, 38.12 

kilograms of 94-percent pure methamphetamine were found hidden under 

trapdoors in the vehicle. Those drugs were worth between $380,000 and 

$1.1 million. Along with the inconsistencies in Rosales Hernandez’s story 

and his demeanor throughout the investigation, this quantity of concealed 

drugs provided sufficient evidence for the jury to find Rosales Hernandez 

Case: 22-50199 Document: 00516581178 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/16/2022
No. 22-50199

4

guilty of importing methamphetamine. His conviction is therefore not “a 

manifest miscarriage of justice.” Oti, 872 F.3d at 686 (cleaned up).

Finally, Rosales Hernandez’s challenge to the jury’s split verdict lacks 

merit “as it is well established that juries are entitled to render inconsistent 

verdicts.” United States v. Parks, 68 F.3d 860, 865 (5th Cir. 1995). Indeed, 

“inconsistent verdicts are not a bar to conviction so long as there is sufficient 

evidence to support the jury’s determination of guilt.” United States v. 

Sanders, 952 F.3d 263, 276 (5th Cir. 2020) (cleaned up). As we explained, 

sufficient evidence did support Rosales Hernandez’s conviction for 

importing methamphetamine.

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 22-50199 Document: 00516581178 Page: 4 Date Filed: 12/16/2022