Opinion ID: 589445
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Bantula

Text: 18 More than sufficient evidence supported Bantula's conviction: 1) Bantula arrived at the Safeway lot at the same time co-defendant Pelaez was to meet his source to set up the cocaine delivery, 2) Bantula arrived with Perez, the load car driver, 3) after Bantula and co-defendant Romero spoke with Pelaez and Perez, Pelaez told DEA Agent Gonzalez that he had met his people and that the cocaine would be delivered, 4) Bantula drove his Jaguar in tandem with the load car down Anza Avenue, 5) Bantula leased the Palos Verdes stash house where the cocaine was stored, and 6) receipts for paging devices, which are commonly used by narcotics traffickers, were found among his papers, including one receipt made out to Perez. 19 The cases cited by Bantula, see, e.g., Penagos, 823 F.2d at 348-49 (9th Cir.1987); United States v. Valenzuela, 596 F.2d 824, 830-31 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 965 (1979), can be distinguished from the case at bar. The weight of the evidence here establishes a slight connection to the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. Bantula affirmatively furthered the object of the conspiracy by driving Perez to the load car and providing the stash house 1 and phone paging devices. Moreover, given that co-conspirators such as Perez had possession of the cocaine, there was sufficient evidence to convict Bantula for possession of cocaine as well. See Torres-Rodriguez, 930 F.2d at 1382.