Opinion ID: 164559
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sufficiency of the Evidence — Conspiracy to Act as an Accessory

Text: 54 Next, Mr. Lang claims that insufficient evidence exists to convict him of conspiring with Mrs. Lang to act as an accessory after the fact to the drug trafficking operation. We review the sufficiency of evidence in a light most favorable to the government to determine if there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable jury could find the existence of a conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Ailsworth, 138 F.3d 843, 850 (10th Cir.1998). To obtain a conviction for conspiracy, the government must prove that (1) there was an agreement to violate the law; (2) Defendant knew the essential objectives of the conspiracy; (3) Defendant knowingly and voluntarily took part in the conspiracy; and (4) the coconspirators were interdependent. Id. In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, we review the record de novo. United States v. Urena, 27 F.3d 1487, 1489 (10th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 977, 115 S.Ct. 455, 130 L.Ed.2d 364 (1994). 55 Of the four elements of conspiracy, Mr. Lang claims only that insufficient evidence exists to support the first requirement, the existence of an agreement to violate the law. Ailsworth, 138 F.3d at 850. To prove an agreement, [t]he government need not offer direct proof of an express agreement on the part of the defendant. Instead the agreement may be informal and may be inferred entirely from circumstantial evidence. United States v. Whitney, 229 F.3d 1296, 1301 (10th Cir.2000) (citations omitted). Indeed, the defendant's participation in, or connection to, the conspiracy need only be slight, if there is sufficient evidence to establish that connection beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. Acceptable circumstantial evidence of agreement could include: a common motive, presence in a situation where one could assume participants would not allow bystanders, repeated acts, mutual knowledge with joint action, and the giving out of misinformation to cover up [the illegal activity]. Id. (quotations omitted). 56 The record evidence supports the conspiracy conviction. First, Mr. Ure testified that a person closely resembling Mr. Lang visited his house the day after Mrs. Lang removed the sealed documents from the clerk's office. According to Mr. Ure, the individual told Mr. Ure that he had this paper, and that he had gotten it from somebody that thought that he [the individual] might know the people that was [sic] involved that was in the paper. Furthermore, Mr. Lang admitted in his tapped cell-phone conversations that he had a friend ... that works down at the federal courthouse, and paperwork came through on you. Further, after Mrs. Lang returned from work with the affidavit, Mr. Lang admits that he and his wife discussed the affidavit and the people mentioned in it before he left the house. 57 The Langs misrepresentations to the FBI further support a finding of sufficient evidence to prove the conspiracy conviction. Id. When first approached by FBI agents, Mrs. Lang stated that she went to bed between 6:30 and 7:00 p.m. on the day she stole the affidavit. After learning from the agents that Mr. Lang called the suspects at approximately 6:15 p.m., however, she abruptly changed her story, stating instead that she went to bed at 6:00 p.m. Moreover, Mrs. Lang initially told FBI agents that she had shredded the extra copy of the affidavit, only to admit later that she had taken it home out of curiosity. In addition, Mr. Lang lied to FBI agents by denying that he called German Perez on the night that Mrs. Lang came home with the affidavit. 58 After reviewing the record, we have little difficulty concluding that sufficient evidence exists to allow a reasonable jury to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a conspiracy existed between the Langs to act as accessories to a drug trafficking operation.