Opinion ID: 77333
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Sufficient Evidence Supported Garcia's Conviction for Conspiracy.

Text: 41 Garcia argues that his mere presence at the scene of a crime is insufficient to convict him for conspiracy, but Garcia was not merely present in a house full of drugs, drug money, drug traffickers, and at least one firearm. Most of the physical evidence against Garcia was found in either his bedroom or bathroom, Garcia admitted the drugs were his, and one of the digital scales had cocaine residue. Garcia testified the drugs were merely for his personal use, but the jury reasonably could have concluded that the drugs were for distribution because a defendant [who] chooses to testify . . . runs the risk that if disbelieved `the jury might conclude the opposite of his testimony is true.' United States v. Brown, 53 F.3d 312, 314 (11th Cir.1995) (quoting Atkins v. Singletary, 965 F.2d 952, 961 n. 7 (11th Cir.1992)). Garcia lived with two conspirators and was related through his common-law marriage to Cuevas, the ringleader of the conspiracy. It would have been reasonable to conclude that Garcia's drug activity was related to the charged conspiracy. 42 The DEA agents also found nearly $300,000 in Garcia's house, most of it in his bedroom closet. A person who owns or exercises dominion and control over a . . . residence in which contraband is concealed may be deemed to be in constructive possession of the contraband, United States v. Vera, 701 F.2d 1349, 1357 (11th Cir. 1983), and a defendant involved only in the money laundering facet of the drug business could be considered a part of the conspiracy to distribute those drugs, United States v. High, 117 F.3d 464, 469 (11th Cir.1997). The large sum of money in Garcia's room provided yet another basis for conviction. Sufficient evidence supported Garcia's conviction for conspiracy. 43