United States of America v. Luis Carlos Rendon-Agudelo

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LUIS CARLOS RENDON-AGUDELO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-50212
D.C. No. 5:07-cr-00032-VAP-3
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 5, 2012**
Pasadena, California
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, TROTT and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Luis Carlos Rendon-Agudelo appeals his conviction for conspiring to import
and distribute cocaine. We affirm.
FILED
JUN 07 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

-2-
I
The evidence presented at trial was sufficient to convict Rendon-Agudelo.
A defendant may be convicted of knowing participation in a conspiracy if the
evidence establishes beyond a reasonable doubt “even a slight connection”
between the defendant and the conspiracy. United States v. Perlaza, 439 F.3d
1149, 1177 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). In this case, the
Government presented testimonial, photographic, audio, and video evidence of
Rendon-Agudelo meeting and discussing the proposed cocaine shipments with the
other conspirators. A rational juror could have concluded that Rendon-Agudelo
was a co-conspirator based on this and other evidence introduced at trial.
II
The district court did not err by admitting testimony about Rendon-
Agudelo’s ownership of a drug shipment. The judge struck the testimony, and
promptly instructed the jury to disregard the witness’s statement. See
Supplemental Excerpts of Record at 671. Jurors are presumed to follow the court’s
instructions. See Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373, 400 n.14 (1999).
III
The district court did not err by giving a jury instruction that incorporated
language from United States v. Causey, 835 F.2d 1289, 1292 (9th Cir. 1987). If a

-- 2 of 3 --

-3-
jury instruction fairly conveys the elements of the offense, this Court reviews its
specific formulation for abuse of discretion. United States v. Frega, 179 F.3d 793,
806 n.16 (9th Cir. 1999). When the government charges a defendant with aiding
and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2(b), “the government need not prove that someone
other than the defendant was guilty of the substantive crime.” Causey, 835 F.2d at
1292. Rendon-Agudelo was charged with aiding and abetting a Government
informant’s importation of cocaine into the United States. A defendant can be
convicted of aiding and abetting an undercover informant where he directs the
informant to undertake acts that would be criminal if the defendant undertook them
himself. See United States v. Gould, 419 F.2d 825, 826 (9th Cir. 1969) (per
curiam).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --