US v. Jaime Castro, No. 08-5236 (4th Cir. 2010)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-5236 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. JAIME AVELAR CASTRO, a/k/a Jaime Avelar-Castro, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00278-LMB-1) Submitted: April 22, 2010 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Decided: NIEMEYER, Circuit May 19, 2010 Judge, and Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John O. Iweanoge, II, IWEANOGE LAW CENTER, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Dana Boente, United States Attorney, Joshua L. Rogers, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Following a three-day trial, Jaime Avelar Castro was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, three counts of distribution of cocaine, and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. ยงยง 2, 841(a)(1) & 846 (2006). judgment of imprisonment The district acquittal on each and court denied sentenced count, to be Castro s Castro served to motions sixty for months concurrently. On appeal, Castro challenges the sufficiency of the evidence as to each count of conviction. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that acquittal a where conviction. district the court evidence is must enter insufficient Fed. R. Crim. P. 29(a). a judgment to sustain of a We review the district court s denial of a Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal de novo. United States v. Alerre, 430 F.3d 681, 693 (4th Cir. 2005). A defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence bears a heavy burden. United States v. Beidler, 110 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1997) (internal quotation marks omitted). The jury s verdict must be sustained if there is substantial evidence, taking the view most favorable to the Government, to support it. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942); United States v. Abu Ali, 528 F.3d 210, 244 (4th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted), cert. denied, 2 129 S. Ct. 1312 (2009). This court ha[s] defined substantial evidence as evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Alerre, 430 F.3d at 693 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). reviewing for substantial evidence, we consider In both circumstantial and direct evidence and allow the Government all reasonable inferences from the facts shown to those sought to be established. United States v. Harvey, 532 F.3d 326, 333 (4th Cir. 2008). To convict Castro of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, the Government had to prove that there was an agreement between two or more people to distribute cocaine, that Castro knew of the agreement, and that he knowingly and voluntarily became part of the conspiracy. (4th Cir. 1996). United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 857 To prove the three counts of distribution, the Government had to show that Castro knowingly and intentionally distributed cocaine. 227 (4th Cir. constructive. transferred United States v. Yearwood, 518 F.3d 220, 2008). Distribution can be actual or The defendant need not actually have physically the cocaine in order to substantive offense of distribution. 842 F.2d 502, 507 (1st Cir. 1988). be found guilty of the United States v. Acevedo, To support a conviction for possession with intent to distribute, the Government must prove 3 that Castro distribute knowingly or possessed deliver the the cocaine and See United cocaine. Collins, 412 F.3d 515, 519 (4th Cir. 2005). narcotic if exercise dominion Schocket, he 753 States v. Possession may be A person has constructive possession of a knows F.2d to United States v. Rusher, 966 F.2d 868, actual or constructive. 878 (4th Cir. 1992). intended of and its presence control 336, 340 over (4th and has it. Cir. the United 1985). power to States v. Once it is established that a defendant is a participant in a conspiracy to possess and distribute a controlled substance, he need not have actual possession of the controlled substance to be guilty of the substantive charge of possession with intent to distribute. Constructive Laughman, possession 618 F.2d is 1067, sufficient. 1076-77 (4th United Cir. 1980) States v. (citations omitted). With these standards in mind, our thorough review of the trial transcript convinces us that the evidence was sufficient to support Castro s convictions on all five counts. We therefore affirm Castro s convictions. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.