USA V. ALFONSO SANCHEZ-ELORZA, No. 12-30110 (9th Cir. 2013)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 07 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 12-30110 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:11-CR-00175-ELJ-3 v. MEMORANDUM * ALFONSO SANCHEZ-ELORZA, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted April 11, 2013 Seattle, Washington Before: CALLAHAN and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges, and COLLINS, District Judge.** * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Cir. R. 36-3. ** The Honorable Raner C. Collins, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation. 1 This case arises from the district court s denial of Appellant s motion for judgment of acquittal. On appeal, such a claim is reviewed de novo. United States v. Ruiz, 462 F.3d 1082, 1087-88 (9th Cir. 2006). We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, whether any rational trier of fact could have found that the government proved each element of the charged crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979). The record in this case shows more than Appellant s mere presence in the vehicle. A reasonable juror could have determined that Appellant knew the drugs were in the trunk, that he played a part in putting the drugs in the trunk, that he knew that a drug transaction was going to take place at the Fort Hall casino, and that he accompanied the conspirators to the casino in furtherance of the drug transaction. Appellant has not pointed to evidence so supportive of innocence that no rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Nevils, 598 F.3d 1158, 1169 (9th Cir. 2010) (emphasis added). AFFIRMED. 2

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.