Court Opinion

ID: 9384373
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-03 18:01:02.327758+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:53.051777
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40534     Document: 00516698395          Page: 1    Date Filed: 04/03/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                ____________                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                  No. 22-40534
                                                                            FILED
                                                                         April 3, 2023
                                Summary Calendar
                                ____________                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Juan Victor Larraga Solano,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 5:20-CR-1134-1
                  ______________________________

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Juan Victor Larraga Solano was convicted, following a jury trial, of one
   count of conspiracy to import 50 grams or more methamphetamine, in
   violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 963, 952(a), 960(a)(1) and (b)(1)(H), and one count
   of importation of 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of

          _____________________
          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
   circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-40534      Document: 00516698395          Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/03/2023

                                    No. 22-40534

   §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1) and (b)(1)(H) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.          On appeal, he
   challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. For the
   reasons stated below, we AFFIRM.
          Because Larraga Solano moved for a judgment of acquittal at the close
   of the Government’s case but did not renew his Federal Rule of Criminal
   Procedure 29 motion at the close of all of the evidence, this court applies
   plain error review. See United States v. Cabello, 33 F.4th 281, 285 (5th Cir.
   2022); United States v. Oti, 872 F.3d 678, 686 (5th Cir. 2017). Thus, he must
   show that “the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt or that the
   evidence is so tenuous that a conviction is shocking.” Cabello, 33 F.4th at
   288 (internal quotation marks, citation, and brackets omitted). Relief is
   appropriate under this standard only if the Government’s evidence is
   “obviously insufficient and the defendant shows a manifest miscarriage of
   justice.” United States v. Suarez, 879 F.3d 626, 631 (5th Cir. 2018) (internal
   quotation marks and citation omitted).
          In order to prove conspiracy to import methamphetamine, the
   Government was required to establish that: (1) a defendant agreed to import
   drugs and (2) knowingly and voluntarily participated in the agreement.
   United States v. Zamora-Salazar, 860 F.3d 826, 832 (5th Cir. 2017). To prove
   importation of methamphetamine, the Government had to establish that the
   defendant: (1) played a role in bringing a controlled substance into the United
   States from outside of the country; (2) knew the substance was controlled;
   and (3) knew the substance would enter the United States. Id.
          Larraga Solano does not dispute the existence of a conspiracy or that
   the importation of methamphetamine occurred; instead, he challenges only
   the mens rea element, arguing that the Government did not establish proof
   that he had knowledge of the methamphetamine hidden in items in the trunk
   of his vehicle. Any element of conspiracy to import drugs may be inferred

                                             2
Case: 22-40534      Document: 00516698395          Page: 3     Date Filed: 04/03/2023

                                    No. 22-40534

   from circumstantial evidence. Id. The necessary knowledge and intent to
   prove importation of a controlled substance can also be proven by
   circumstantial evidence. United States v. Lopez-Monzon, 850 F.3d 202, 206
   (5th Cir. 2017). Exercise of control over a vehicle where an illegal substance
   is concealed creates an inference of knowledge of its presence, but where
   drugs are concealed in a hidden compartment, “circumstantial evidence that
   is suspicious in nature or demonstrates guilty knowledge” is also required.
   Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
          A review of the record reveals that there was sufficient circumstantial
   evidence presented at trial for a reasonable jury to infer Larraga Solano’s
   knowledge of the concealed methamphetamine. See Cabello, 33 F.4th at 285.
   Border agents testified that Larraga Solano appeared nervous. He gave an
   implausible story, stating that he asked a colleague to check the car he was
   driving with a canine in advance but then failed to inspect any of the actual
   items placed in the trunk before leaving for the United States. It was
   implausible that he was traveling 750 miles across an international border to
   transport food items, including meat in ice chests and other items available
   in the United States, and to spend 40 minutes in two clothing stores. See
   Lopez-Monzon, 850 F.3d at 206-08. There were also inconsistencies in his
   stories, including stops he was making during his trip and whether his car was
   rented or loaned. See id. at 206-07.
          Moreover, a jury may infer guilty knowledge when the illicit cargo is
   valuable enough that it is not rational to believe that it would be entrusted to
   an unknowing party. See United States v. Del Aguila-Reyes, 722 F.2d 155, 157
   (5th Cir. 1983); see also Lopez-Monzon, 850 F.3d at 208 (stating that the value
   of the drug being transported is an example of circumstantial evidence that
   may    be   probative   of   knowledge).        Here,     44.56   kilograms   of
   methamphetamine valued between $200,000 and $1.12 million were
   concealed within items in the trunk of the vehicle Larraga Solano was driving.

                                              3
Case: 22-40534        Document: 00516698395        Page: 4   Date Filed: 04/03/2023

                                    No. 22-40534

   Along with his demeanor during the investigation and the implausibility of
   and inconsistencies in his story, this quantity of concealed drugs provided
   sufficient evidence for the jury to find Larraga Solano guilty of conspiracy to
   import methamphetamine and importation of methamphetamine. See Lopez-
   Monzon, 850 F.3d at 206-08. Accordingly, Larraga Solano has not shown that
   the record is devoid of evidence supporting his guilt or that the result
   constitutes a miscarriage of justice. See Cabello, 33 F.4th at 288; Suarez,
   879 F.3d at 631.
          The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                             4