United States v. Ahmed Khan ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •            IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    December 14, 2007
    No. 06-11228                     Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Summary Calendar                           Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    Plaintiff – Appellee
    v.
    SHARIQ AHMED KHAN
    Defendant – Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:05-CR-133-2
    Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Appellant Shariq Ahmed Khan (“Khan”) appeals his conviction of one
    count of Conspiracy to Transport and Harbor Aliens Illegally in the United
    States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii), (iii), and (v)(I); three counts of
    Transportation of Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting in violation of 8 U.S.C.
    § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2; and three counts of Harboring
    Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii)
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    No. 06-11228
    and (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Khan asserts that these convictions were not
    supported by sufficient evidence. Because we find that the government produced
    sufficient evidence to support these convictions, we affirm.
    I. BACKGROUND
    In the Summer of 2005, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
    Senior Special Agent Robert J. Hlavac was conducting an investigation involving
    the sale of fraudulent immigration documents to illegal aliens in Dallas, Texas.
    During the investigation, ICE Special Agent David Guerra, Jr. had numerous
    meetings with Khan, in which Agent Guerra was working undercover and posing
    as a person who had access to a corrupt Citizenship and Immigration Services
    (CIS) employee. In June 2005, Khan met with Agent Guerra and told him he
    was interested in obtaining work permits for individuals from India. Agent
    Guerra told Khan that he would charge $3,000 per person each time documents
    were purchased. It was contemplated that this money would be used to bribe the
    corrupt CIS official that Agent Guerra allegedly had access to.
    Subsequently, Syed Shahabuddin transported numerous illegal aliens
    from Chicago to Dallas, in part by automobile, to pre-arranged meetings with
    Khan in Dallas.1 According to Shahabuddin, he transported such individuals
    from Chicago to Dallas based upon information from a man named Naseem
    Khan in Chicago and based upon requests from the individuals themselves.
    Once Shahabuddin arrived in Dallas, he would call Shariq Khan for directions
    to a meeting place–usually a restaurant parking lot. Khan would meet with
    Shahabuddin, the illegal alien(s), and Agent Guerra. Agent Guerra then sold
    fraudulent immigration documents to Khan, who in turn sold them to the
    alien(s) for $6,000 each.
    1
    Shahabuddin testified that he had known Khan since 1991, at which time Khan lived
    in Chicago.
    2
    No. 06-11228
    These meetings occurred on approximately August 25, September 14, and
    October 20, 2005.2 The meetings were observed by Agent Hlavac and other
    agents, who were conducting surveillance.
    On May 17, 2006, a grand jury returned a superseding indictment
    charging Khan with the following offenses: one count of Conspiracy to Defraud
    the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Count One); two counts of
    Fraud and Misuse of Documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1546(a) and 2
    (Counts Two and Three); one count of Fraud and Misuse of Documents in
    violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 2 (Count Four); one count of Conspiracy to
    Transport and Harbor Aliens Illegally in the United States in violation of 8
    U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii), (iii), and (v)(I) (Count Five); three counts of
    Transportation of Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting in violation of 8 U.S.C.
    § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Counts Six, Eight, and Ten); and
    three counts of Harboring Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting in violation of
    8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Counts Seven, Nine,
    and Eleven). Khan pleaded not guilty to all counts.
    On October 23 and 24, 2006, Khan was tried before a jury. The jury
    acquitted Khan of Counts Three and Four, but convicted him on the other
    counts. On February 13, 2007, the district court sentenced Khan to 33 months
    imprisonment for each count, to be served concurrently, plus three years of
    supervised release for each count, also to run concurrently. The court also
    imposed a mandatory special assessment of $900. Khan now appeals Counts
    Five through Eleven.3
    2
    The illegal aliens involved in the August 25 meeting were Sonia Nayab and Rais
    Uddin. The illegal aliens involved in the September 14 meeting were Ashish Patel and Payal
    Patel. The illegal aliens involved in the October 20 meeting included Pravinkumar Patel,
    Shaunakkumar Patel, Ranjanbahen Patel, and Ashish Patel.
    3
    8 U.S.C. § 1324(a) governs Counts Five through Eleven. Section 1324(a) provides in
    relevant part:
    3
    No. 06-11228
    II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
    In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court must “affirm if a
    rational trier of fact could have found that the evidence established the essential
    elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Lopez, 
    74 F.3d 575
    , 577 (5th Cir. 1996). We review the evidence, “whether direct or
    circumstantial, in the light most favorable to the jury verdict” and “[a]ll
    credibility determinations and reasonable inferences are to be resolved in favor
    of the verdict.” United States v. Resio-Trejo, 
    45 F.3d 907
    , 910-11 (5th Cir. 1995).
    “The evidence need not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence or be
    wholly inconsistent with every conclusion except that of guilt, and the jury is
    free to choose among reasonable constructions of the evidence.” 
    Lopez, 74 F.3d at 577
    .
    III. DISCUSSION
    A. Conspiracy to Transport and Harbor Aliens Illegally in the United
    States
    Khan asserts that the government produced insufficient evidence of his
    participation in a conspiracy to transport and harbor illegal aliens because
    (1)(A) Any person who–
    (ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or
    remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to
    transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or
    otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;
    (iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or
    remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from
    detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any
    place, including any building or any means of transportation; [or]
    ***
    (v)(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
    (II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
    shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).
    4
    No. 06-11228
    Shahabuddin, a government witness and Khan’s alleged co-conspirator, testified
    that: (1) he did not know that the people he transported from Chicago to Dallas
    were illegal aliens; (2) the illegal aliens talked to someone else–not Khan–about
    coming to Dallas; and (3) it was the illegal aliens–not Khan–who asked
    Shahabuddin to help them get to Dallas.
    The jury, however, was not required to believe Shahabuddin’s testimony,
    and there is ample other evidence in the record showing Khan’s participation in
    the conspiracy.
    To prove Conspiracy to Transport and Harbor Aliens Illegally in the
    United States in violation of § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii), (iii), and v(I), the government
    was required to prove that Khan agreed with one or more persons to transport
    or move illegal aliens within the United States in furtherance of their unlawful
    presence, or to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection such aliens, knowingly
    or in reckless disregard of the fact that such aliens had come to, entered, or
    remained in the United States in violation of law.
    To prove a conspiracy, “[n]o express agreement to violate the law need be
    shown and the conspiracy may be proven by showing that the defendant
    conspired with one or more others, named or unnamed, to achieve an illegal
    purpose.” United States v. Martin, 
    790 F.2d 1215
    , 1219-20 (5th Cir. 1986). A
    conspiracy, or participation therein, need not be proved by direct evidence–“[t]he
    conspiracy's existence can be inferred from the facts and circumstances of a
    particular case.” United States v. Robertson, 
    659 F.2d 652
    , 656 (5th Cir. 1981).
    “[A] common purpose and plan may be inferred from a development and
    collocation of circumstances,” 
    id. (internal quotations
    omitted), and evidence of
    concerted action “can indicate agreement and voluntary participation” in the
    conspiracy. United States v. Quiroz-Hernandez, 
    48 F.3d 858
    , 866 (5th Cir. 1995).
    The    circumstantial    evidence       shows   that   Khan   agreed   with
    someone–whether it was Shahabuddin, “Naseem Khan,” or the aliens
    5
    No. 06-11228
    themselves–that the aliens would be transported to a meeting place in Dallas
    where they would pay him to obtain fraudulent immigration documents. Khan
    devised a scheme to obtain work permits for undocumented workers through the
    bribery of a supposedly corrupt immigration employee. The undocumented
    workers traveled to Dallas and paid Khan up to $6,000 each for the work
    permits. Shahabuddin transported the illegal aliens while in Dallas. Khan
    directed Shahabuddin’s driving while in Dallas, ultimately guiding Shahabuddin
    and the aliens he was with to meetings with him and Agent Guerra. On at least
    one occasion, on August 25, 2005, the aliens–Nayab and Uddis–were kept at a
    house prior to being transported to the parking lot meeting. Nayab testified that
    the house they stayed at was Khan’s, and Khan accompanied them to the
    meeting with Agent Guerra. Furthermore, the testimony of Ashish and Payal
    Patel provided evidence that Khan was the one who told them to come to Dallas
    for the work permits. Finally, as Khan’s entire scheme was to provide illegal
    aliens with phony immigration documents, it is clear that Khan knew that the
    aliens with which he was dealing were in the United States illegally and that his
    acts were in furtherance of their unlawful presence.
    This evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, is
    sufficient for a rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the
    charged conspiracy existed and Khan voluntarily participated in it.
    B. Transportation of Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting
    Khan contests the sufficiency of the evidence for his conviction on three
    counts of Transportation of Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting in violation
    of §1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 for the transportation of Rais
    Uddin, Ashish Patel, and Ranjanbahen Patel–Counts Six, Eight, and Ten,
    respectively.
    Aiding and abetting occurs “when the defendant associates with the
    criminal venture, purposefully participates in it, and seeks by his actions to
    6
    No. 06-11228
    make it succeed.” United States v. Vaden, 
    912 F.2d 780
    , 783 (5th Cir. 1990).
    Aiding and abetting thus has two components: “[a]n act on the part of a
    defendant which contributes to the execution of a crime and the intent to aid in
    its commission.” United States v. Smith, 
    546 F.2d 1275
    , 1284 (5th Cir. 1976).
    Additionally, “[t]he evidence supporting a conspiracy conviction is generally
    sufficient to support an aiding and abetting conviction as well.” United States
    v. Gonzales, 
    121 F.3d 928
    , 936 (5th Cir. 1997).
    The record demonstrates that Khan committed acts which contributed to
    the unlawful transportation of the named illegal aliens and intended to aid in
    such transportation, in furtherance of the aliens’ unlawful presence.                    As
    described above, the record shows that: Khan agreed with someone that illegal
    aliens would be transported to Dallas where they would purchase fraudulent
    immigration documents; Khan directed Shahabuddin’s driving in Dallas, guiding
    Shahabuddin and the illegal aliens to pre-arranged meetings; and, on at least
    one occasion, he guided Shahabuddin and the aliens to his house, where they
    spent the night, and the next morning he guided and accompanied them to the
    meeting with Agent Guerra.4 Furthermore, it is clear that Khan intended to aid
    in the transportation of the aliens and for such transportation to succeed, as he
    would not get paid unless the aliens were successfully transported to the
    meeting with him and Agent Guerra.
    4
    Although there was direct evidence that Khan directed Shahabuddin’s driving once
    Shahabuddin was in Dallas with Uddin and Ashish Patel, there is only circumstantial evidence
    of such direction with respect to Ranjanbahen Patel. In fact, the testimony indicates that
    Ranjanbahen arrived at the parking lot meeting in a vehicle driven by an unidentified male.
    Although there is no direct evidence linking Khan with the direction of this vehicle, the
    evidence shows that Khan was the point person for the Dallas meetings and was the only
    person to direct other aliens to similar meetings on previous occasions. Thus, the jury could
    have reasonably concluded that in accordance with Khan’s overall scheme, Khan directed
    Ranjanbahen or his driver to the meeting, as Ranjanbahen would have had no way to find the
    meeting location but for Khan’s direction.
    7
    No. 06-11228
    Viewed in the light most favorable to the government, this evidence is
    sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Khan aided
    and abetted the illegal transportation of the named aliens.
    C. Harboring Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting
    Finally, Khan contests the sufficiency of the evidence for his conviction on
    three counts of Harboring Illegal Aliens and Aiding and Abetting in violation of
    §1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 for the unlawful harboring by
    automobile of Sonia Nayab, Payal Patel, and Pravinkumar Patel–Counts Seven,
    Nine, and Eleven, respectively.
    Harboring encompasses “activity tending substantially to facilitate an
    alien's remaining in the United States illegally.” United States v. Cantu, 
    557 F.2d 1173
    , 1180 (5th Cir. 1977) (internal quotations omitted).                      Section
    1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) prohibits harboring “in any place, including . . . any means of
    transportation.”
    For the same reasons the jury could conclude that Khan aided and abetted
    the illegal transportation of aliens, the jury could conclude that Khan committed
    acts which contributed to the harboring of the named illegal aliens and intended
    to aid in such harboring. The transportation in Dallas was necessary for the
    accomplishment of Khan’s entire scheme and clearly facilitated the named
    aliens’ unlawful presence in the United States.5
    IV. CONCLUSION
    5
    There is admittedly only slight circumstantial evidence that Khan aided and abetted
    in the harboring of Pravinkumar Patel. However, viewed in the light most favorable to the
    government and given the evidence of Khan’s intimate involvement in the entire scheme, there
    was sufficient evidence with respect to this count of aiding and abetting harboring. Agent
    Hlavac witnessed Pravinkumar at the October 20, 2005 meeting with Khan and Agent Guerra,
    and another alien testified that Pravinkumar was in a group of aliens from Chicago. Based
    on this evidence and the evidence of the logistics of Khan’s entire scheme, it was reasonable
    for the jury to believe that: Pravinkumar was an illegal alien present to purchase fraudulent
    immigration documents, Pravinkumar came to the meeting by automobile as other aliens had
    before him, and that Khan–in accordance with his past actions–directed Pravinkumar to the
    meeting.
    8
    No. 06-11228
    For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is
    AFFIRMED.
    9