United States v. Diaz-Salas

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
January 29, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-50568
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JESUS FERNANDO DIAZ-SALAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP–02-CR-1961-ALL
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jesus Fernando Diaz-Salas appeals his jury trial convictions
for importation of more that 100 kilograms of marijuana and
possession with intent to deliver more than 100 kilograms of
marijuana. Diaz argues on appeal that the evidence is
insufficient to show that he had knowledge that the marijuana was
in a hidden compartment in the trailer he was towing and that the

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-50568
-2-
district court erred in instructing the jury on deliberate
ignorance.
There was testimony that Diaz suspected that the trailer
might contain drugs, that he never requested an X-ray, that Diaz
had looked inside the trailer before approaching the border and
that the alterations were obvious to the inspecting officer, that
Dias was hesitant in answering the X-ray inspector’s questions,
and that the trailer contained marijuana worth at least
$1,000,000. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to
the verdict and accepting the jury’s credibility determinations,
we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support Diaz’s
convictions. See United States v. Chavez, 119 F.3d 342, 347 (5th
Cir. 1997); United States v. Loe, 262 F.3d 427, 432 (5th Cir.
2001).
The evidence at trial raised the inferences necessary to
support the district court’s decision to instruct the jury on
deliberate ignorance. See United States v. Lara-Velasquez, 919
F.2d 946, 951 (5th Cir. 1990).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --