Opinion ID: 620949
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Ochoa's conspiracy conviction.

Text: Ochoa first argues that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of conspiracy to possess with intent to deliver cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846. [3] Ordinarily, the standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence is whether any reasonable trier of fact could have found that the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Hayes, 342 F.3d 385, 389 (5th Cir.2003). Here, however, Ochoa never moved for a judgment of acquittal. Therefore, we review only to determine whether the conviction amounts to a manifest miscarriage of justice. United States v. Aguilar, 503 F.3d 431, 435 (5th Cir.2007). This standard is far more strict than plain error review. United States v. Mudekunye, 646 F.3d 281, 293 (5th Cir.2011). Ochoa's conviction should be reversed only if the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt or contains evidence on a key element of the offense that is so tenuous that a conviction would be shocking. United States v. Dowl, 619 F.3d 494, 500 (5th Cir.2010); see Aguilar, 503 F.3d at 435. To establish a conspiracy, the government must prove that: (1) an agreement existed between two or more persons to violate federal narcotics law, (2) the defendant knew of the existence of the agreement, and (3) the defendant voluntarily participated in the conspiracy. United States v. Cardenas, 9 F.3d 1139, 1157 (5th Cir.1993). Ochoa argues that the government failed to prove the second and third elements, namely, that Ochoa knew the agreement was to transport cocaine and voluntarily participated in it. [E]ach element may be proven by circumstantial evidence, United States v. Mulderig, 120 F.3d 534, 547 (5th Cir. 1997), and proof of a tacit conspiratorial agreement is sufficient, United States v. Freeman, 434 F.3d 369, 376 (5th Cir.2005). To prove the defendant's participation in a conspiracy, it is not necessary to prove that he knew exactly how others would carry out their parts of the scheme: Where the activities of one aspect of the scheme are necessary or advantageous to the success of another aspect of the scheme or to the overall success of the venture, where there are several parts inherent in a larger common plan, or where the character of the property involved or nature of the activity is such that knowledge on the part of one member concerning the existence and function of other members of the same scheme is necessarily implied due to the overlapping nature of the various roles of the participants, the existence of a single conspiracy will be inferred. United States v. Thomas, 12 F.3d 1350, 1358 (5th Cir.1994) (quoting United States v. Elam, 678 F.2d 1234, 1246 (5th Cir. 1982)); see also United States v. Rodriguez, 553 F.3d 380, 391 n. 4 (5th Cir.2008) (Conspiracy law contemplates the existence of subgroups.). Furthermore, we have inferred knowledge of the conspiracy when the defendant is entrusted to carry a large amount of drugs. United States v. Villarreal, 324 F.3d 319, 324 (5th Cir.2003) (inferring knowledge based on drugs that were worth $300,000). We hold that the evidence is sufficient to affirm Ochoa's conviction. Taking all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, the government established both that Ochoa knew of, and voluntarily participated in, the conspiracy:  Ochoa was present at the gas station where the drop-off was arranged to occur,  Julio4 told Guerra that his contact would arrive at the gas station in five minutes, and Ochoa arrived seven minutes later,  Ochoa pulled up behind Guerra's truck,  the truck he drove was not registered to him,  Guerra received a phone call from the 254 number moments after he saw Ochoa on his phone,  Guerra was instructed by his contact at the 254 number to follow the car that had just pulled into the gas station,  Ochoa used designated code names to identify both himself and Guerra,  he told Guerra to follow him and began pulling out of the gas station,  the cocaine was worth approximately $150,000,  Ochoa had been in contact six or seven times with the person at the 254 number,  the 254 number was saved in Ochoa's contact list under the name Julio4,  during questioning, Ochoa gave conflicting reasons for his presence at the gas station, and  he turned over a bag of methamphetamine during questioning. Based on Guerra's testimony and the phone records submitted by the government, the jury could reasonably infer that Julio4 directed the conspiracy involving Ochoa and Guerra and told Ochoa when and where to go for the drop off. Ochoa had been in ongoing contact with Julio4 throughout the evening before he met Guerra. Moreover, the large amount of drugs involved and Ochoa's knowledge of the secret code names indicate that he knew the illegal purpose of the conspiracy. In sum, sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.