Opinion ID: 607056
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: 4 The defendants were convicted of a complex alien smuggling conspiracy extending across Canada, into the state of Washington, and thence to Florida. The scheme involved numerous Trinidadian aliens residing in Canada who faced deportation as the result of changes in Canadian immigration policy. 5 Several of the aliens made initial contact with another co-defendant in Toronto. Others communicated by phone with Sabha in Miami. They were advised to travel to Vancouver, British Columbia where Rai helped to smuggle them across the border into Washington state. United States Border Patrol agents observed the aliens crossing the border five times. 6 Several of the aliens traveled to Florida where Sabha ran an immigration consulting service. He and his employee Rajkumar assisted them in making fraudulent applications under the amnesty program established by the Immigration Reform and Control Act. 7 Rajkumar concedes that the government proved a conspiracy between his co-defendants but maintains that he was not part of it. He argues that the evidence established only that he was an innocent employee who assisted coincidentally with the scheme. 8 We will sustain a conviction if, reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Bishop, 959 F.2d 820, 829 (9th Cir.1992). Once the conspiracy is established, evidence of even a slight connection to it is sufficient if shown beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Restrepo, 930 F.2d 705, 709 (9th Cir.1991). 9 Knowing participation in a conspiracy may be inferred by circumstantial evidence. United States v. Mares, 940 F.2d 455, 458 (9th Cir.1991). One alien testified that Rajkumar gave her a false Florida address and phone number for an amnesty application. Another testified that Rajkumar was present while the alien and Sabha discussed how to falsify evidence of his illegal entry into the country. He also said that Rajkumar advised him to get money orders and took his photo for a fraudulent amnesty application. Viewing these incidents in context, a rational trier of fact could have found that Rajkumar knew about the illegal activity and purposefully joined the scheme.