Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gonzalo VIDAURRI, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-07-11
Citations: 285 F. App'x 127
Docket Number: No. 07-50949
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gonzalo VIDAURRI, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 285
Pages: 127–128

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gonzalo VIDAURRI, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-50949
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 11, 2008.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Karl A. Basile, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Gonzalo Vidaurri has appealed his jury conviction of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and aiding and abetting. Vidaurri contends that the evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Vidaurri complains that he was convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence only and that the Government did not prove that he knew of the cocaine distribution venture.
Vidaurri did not move the district court for a judgment of acquittal. Accordingly, his "challenge to evidence sufficiency is reviewed only for a manifest miscarriage of justice—the record must be devoid of evidence of guilt or the evidence must be so tenuous that a conviction is shocking." United States v. Avants, 367 F.3d 433, 449 (5th Cir.2004). Vidaurri's post-arrest statements and the circumstances surrounding his arrest provide proof of his guilty knowledge and his participation in the conspiracy. See United States v. Maltos, 985 F.2d 743, 746 (5th Cir.1992). The conviction is
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.