Opinion ID: 507327
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Vallejo

Text: 49 Vallejo, a less active participant in the affairs providing the basis for the charges, was convicted of conspiracy to possess cocaine and possession with intent to distribute arising out of the March 17, 1986 two kilogram cocaine sale to de la Cova. Vallejo argues that there was no proof that he was involved in the conspiracy. The evidence, he argues, shows at best mere association with a drug dealer. 50 Agent de la Cova heard Salazar tell Vallejo on March 15th that he had something very, very good. From this the jury could reasonably conclude that Salazar referred to cocaine and that Vallejo comprehended this meaning. Just two days later, in Vallejo's presence, Gomez delivered two favors to Salazar. It is beyond dispute that Gomez delivered cocaine because Gomez said shortly before he was arrested that the favors were kilograms of cocaine. This cocaine subsequently was transported to Vallejo's house. 51 Further support for the inference that Vallejo was involved in a narcotics conspiracy and distributed cocaine is the fact that he delivered a small amount of cocaine to Salazar on March 21st--only moments after Salazar called and asked for some. When he was arrested, Vallejo had a beeper, $2000 in cash, a small amount of drugs and drug paraphernalia, again evidencing that his business relationship with Salazar related to the narcotics trade. See Carson, 702 F.2d at 368. This proof, as well as the reasonable inferences arising from it, supports the jury's finding that Vallejo was a knowing participant in the conspiracy.