Opinion ID: 1192200
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Le Chen's Testimony Regarding What His Mother Told Him It Would Cost to Smuggle a Person into the United States

Text: During Liera's trial, Le Chen testified that while he was in China his mother told him what it would cost to have a person smuggled into the United States. The district court determined that Le Chen's mother (the declarant) was a co-conspirator and that her statements to Le Chen were admissible as nonhearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E). [11] Liera argues that there was insufficient evidence to establish that Le Chen's mother was involved in a conspiracy and that the testimony was therefore inadmissible. We agree. Before an alleged co-conspirator's statement can be admitted into evidence under Rule 801(d)(2)(E), the government must establish that the declarant (Le Chen's mother) knowingly participated in a conspiracy. See United States v. Castaneda, 16 F.3d 1504, 1507 (9th Cir.1994) ([A]n accused's knowledge of and participation in an alleged conspiracy with the putative co-conspirator are preliminary facts that must be established, by a preponderance of the evidence, before the co-conspirator's out-of-court statements can be introduced into evidence.). To establish that the declarant knowingly participated in a conspiracy, the government cannot rely solely on the [alleged] co-conspirator statements themselves. Id. (citing United States v. Silverman, 861 F.2d 571, 578 (9th Cir.1988)). Here, the only evidence offered by the government to establish that Le Chen's mother was involved in a conspiracy are the hearsay statements the government sought to introduce regarding what Le Chen's mother told Le Chen. During Liera's trial, Le Chen testified that his mother told him that a middleman was going to help smuggle Le Chen into the United States. In particular, Le Chen's mother told Le Chen that they would pay the same amount [their] neighbors paid before, and that Le Chen would work to pay back the money once he arrived in the United States. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2), these statements are insufficient to establish that Le Chen's mother was involved in a conspiracy. [12] See Castaneda, 16 F.3d at 1507 ([T]he government cannot rely solely on the [alleged] co-conspirator statements themselves.). Accordingly, we hold that the district court erred by admitting, under Rule 801(d)(2)(E), Le Chen's hearsay testimony regarding what his mother told him it would cost to smuggle Le Chen into the United States.