Opinion ID: 164723
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: 18 Following the presentation of the government's case, Mr. Stiger moved for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 29, alleging insufficient evidence. We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo. United States v. Overholt, 307 F.3d 1231, 1249 (10th Cir.2002). In so doing, we ask only whether taking the evidence — both direct and circumstantial, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom — in the light most favorable to the government, a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. McKissick, 204 F.3d 1282, 1289 (10th Cir.2000) (internal quotations omitted). We rely on the jury, as the fact finder, to resolve conflicting testimony, weigh the evidence, and draw inferences from the facts presented. United States v. Radcliff, 331 F.3d 1153, 1157 (10th Cir.2003) (internal quotations omitted).
19 Mr. Stiger contends that the District Court erred in denying that motion because the government introduced insufficient evidence to prove that he was a member of the alleged drug conspiracy. Although conceding that the drug conspiracy existed, he argues that the government failed to prove that he had a specific intent to join the Darrell Bellamy conspiracy. To this end, he asserts that the government failed to introduce evidence that he was a member of the Bellamy conspiracy and that, at most, it only proved that [he] was involved in drug distribution and that he and [Mr.] Bellamy had overlapping drug involvement. Inexplicably — and seemingly in conflict with his recitation of facts — he also concludes that he was never involved with the Jennifer Natale torture episode. 20 The record wholly belies Mr. Stiger's assertions that insufficient evidence exists to prove his membership in the Bellamy conspiracy. See infra pp. 2-3. As the government illustrates in its brief, and we confirmed upon our independent review of the record, substantial evidence was presented showing that Mr. Stiger knew the objective of the conspiracy was to profit from the distribution of illegal drugs, that he voluntarily participated, ... that he acted to further the objectives of the conspiracy, and that he took essential and integral steps to help the organization profit from the sale of illegal drugs. We therefore affirm the District Court's decision to deny Mr. Stiger's motion for judgment of acquittal.