Court Opinion

ID: 9839796
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-14 00:00:31.784031+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:42:03.377699
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40323         Document: 00516893794             Page: 1      Date Filed: 09/13/2023

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

                                      ____________                                       FILED
                                                                                 September 13, 2023
                                       No. 22-40323
                                                                                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                     Summary Calendar                                      Clerk
                                     ____________

   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Edgar Yvan Moreno Barragan,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Southern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 7:20-CR-240-7
                      ______________________________

   Before Clement, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Edgar Yvan Moreno Barragan appeals his conviction of conspiracy to
   possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and aiding
   and abetting the possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more
   of cocaine, as well as the resulting concurrent terms of 120 months of
   imprisonment. First, he argues that the district court erred by denying his

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40323      Document: 00516893794           Page: 2    Date Filed: 09/13/2023

                                     No. 22-40323

   motion for a judgment of acquittal. He acknowledges that the Government
   established the possession with intent to distribute over 100 kilograms of
   cocaine by multiple individuals, a conspiracy to do the same, and even the
   transportation of such cocaine. He disagrees, however, that the Government
   provided any evidence that he voluntarily participated in the conspiracy or
   aided and abetted the possession with intent to distribute the cocaine.
          Here, there was ample evidence introduced at trial to permit a rational
   jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Moreno Barragan voluntarily
   participated in the conspiracy. See United States v. Ragsdale, 426 F.3d 765,
   770-71 (5th Cir. 2005); United States v. Thomas, 690 F.3d 358, 366 (5th Cir.
   2012). In light of the evidence presented at trial, a reasonable jury could infer
   that the mechanic shop was not an operational shop at all, but a location
   where conspirators loaded hidden compartments in vehicles with cocaine for
   further transport to various locations. Likewise, a reasonable jury could infer
   that the hidden compartment in the car that Moreno Barragan drove was
   loaded with cocaine at the mechanic shop and unloaded once it arrived at the
   North 32nd Street residence. In light of the aforementioned reasonable
   inferences, law enforcement testimony placed Moreno Barragan with the
   vehicle while cocaine was being loaded into and unloaded from the vehicle.
   It would be unreasonable for Moreno Barragan to be present for loading and
   unloading of cocaine were he not a knowledgeable participant in the
   conspiracy. See United States v. White, 219 F.3d 442, 447 (5th Cir. 2000).
   Further, his nervousness and dishonesty during the traffic stop are evidence
   of “guilty knowledge of and participation in the charged conspiracy.” United
   States v. Ayala, 887 F.2d 62, 68 (5th Cir. 1989). Finally, multiple text
   messages, pictures, and videos on Moreno Barragan’s phone, taken together,
   suggest his involvement in narcotics trafficking.
          Similarly, there was sufficient evidence introduced at trial to permit a
   rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Moreno Barragan

                                          2
Case: 22-40323        Document: 00516893794         Page: 3    Date Filed: 09/13/2023

                                     No. 22-40323

   aided and abetted the possession with intent to distribute cocaine. See
   Ragsdale, 426 F.3d at 770-71; United States v. Scott, 892 F.3d 791, 798-99 (5th
   Cir. 2018). As is typical, the trial evidence supporting Moreno Barragan’s
   participation in the conspiracy also supports his aiding and abetting
   conviction. See Scott, 892 F.3d at 799. Accordingly, the district court did not
   err by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. See Ragsdale, 426 F.3d
   at 770-71.
          Moreno Barragan did not adequately brief, and has thus waived, his
   contention that the district court committed legal error by telling the jury that
   the law did not allow it to aid the jury in understanding a jury instruction. See
   United States v. Stalnaker, 571 F.3d 428, 439-40 (5th Cir. 2009); United States
   v. Miranda, 248 F.3d 434, 443 (5th Cir. 2001).
          Alternatively, Moreno Barragan argues that the district court erred by
   finding him ineligible for a reduction for acceptance of responsibility because
   he chose to go to trial. The sentencing transcript makes clear that the district
   court was aware of its ability to award a reduction for acceptance of
   responsibility despite Moreno Barragan’s decision to go to trial. Because
   Moreno Barragan continued to deny his involvement in the cocaine
   conspiracy and trafficking efforts, there is nothing in the record suggesting
   sincere contrition on his behalf. See United States v. Medina-Anicacio, 325
   F.3d 638, 648 (5th Cir. 2003); U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a); § 3E1.1, comment. (n.2).
   Accordingly, the district court’s decision to deny the reduction was not
   without foundation. See United States v. Hinojosa-Almance, 977 F.3d 407, 410
   (5th Cir. 2020).
          In light of the foregoing, the judgment of the district court is
   AFFIRMED.

                                          3