Opinion ID: 152179
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Elvis Ortiz

Text: Elvis Ortiz argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for 3 involvement in a drug conspiracy or distribution of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 860, or for committing violent crimes in aid of a racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(1). In a related argument, he claims that the evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he participated in the kidnapping of Rafael Guzman, and that the district court erred in denying his Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal as to charges under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1959(a)(5) and (6). He also argues that the evidence was insufficient to allow a jury to conclude that he committed an overt act that would lead to murder rather than to assault; that there was no reasonable evidence to support a finding that he committed an overt act which would lead to maiming an individual, or that he participated in the racketeering enterprise, and; that the district court made unconstitutional findings during the sentencing process and/or imposed an unreasonable sentence.