United States v. Cleotha Young

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
JAN 17 2017
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 15-50516
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No.
3:14-cr-01288-DMS-7
v.
CLEOTHA YOUNG, AKA Stinker, MEMORANDUM*
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 12, 2017**
Pasadena, California
Before: TASHIMA, TALLMAN, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Cleotha Young appeals his conviction following a jury trial for conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana under 21
U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846. After the jury found Young guilty of that offense, Young
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
filed a post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal under Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 29 and argued that the government had not met its burden of proving,
beyond a reasonable doubt, that the scope of Young’s agreement with his
coconspirators encompassed in excess of 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. The
district court denied his motion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, United
States v. Navarrette-Aguilar, 813 F.3d 785, 793 (9th Cir. 2015), it is clear that the
jury had sufficient evidence by which it could find that 1,000 kilograms or more of
marijuana “fell within the scope of [Young’s] agreement with his coconspirators,”
United States v. Banuelos, 322 F.3d 700, 704 (9th Cir. 2003). The record
sufficiently details the coconspirators’ knowledge of the amount of marijuana
being imported, and it is evident that Young was informed of all material issues
relating to the operation. As such, we are satisfied that a rational trier of fact could
have found that Young’s agreement encompassed more than 1,000 kilograms of
marijuana beyond a reasonable doubt. See Navarrette-Aguilar, 813 F.3d at 793.
AFFIRMED.
2