United States v. Lujan-Garcia

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50148
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAVIER LUJAN-GARCIA,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP-99-CR-801-ALL-H
- - - - - - - - - -
December 27, 2000
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Javier Lujan-Garcia (“Lujan”) appeals his convictions for
importation of a quantity of marijuana (in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 952 and 960) and possession of marijuana with intent to
distribute (in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)).
Lujan contends that the evidence was insufficient to support
the knowledge element of his convictions, in that the marijuana
was concealed in a hidden compartment of the Ford Bronco he was
driving. The evidence was not insufficient to support Lujan’s

-- 1 of 3 --

No. 00-50148
-2-
convictions for conspiracy and possession. See United States v.
El-Zoubi, 993 F.2d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v.
Cano-Guel, 167 F.3d 900, 904 (5th Cir. 1999). Lujan, who had
recently been acting as a confidential informant (“CI”) for the
DEA, testified that a leader of the Acosta marijuana-smuggling
organization, Sergio Acosta, had asked him to drive the Bronco
across the Rio Grande to Juarez, Mexico. The Bronco was
allegedly parked on a Juarez street for several hours while
Acosta drove away in a second vehicle; the alleged purpose of the
trip was to determine, later that evening, whether the Bronco
could easily pass through U.S. Immigration inspections. Lujan,
who admittedly had previously picked up drug payments for the
Acosta organization, testified that he did not know that
marijuana had been secreted in the Bronco during this period of
several hours. The jury was entitled to discredit Lujan’s
account of this trip. See United States v. Jones, 185 F.3d 459,
464 (5th Cir. 1999) (constructive possession of drugs may be
shown by control of vehicle in which drugs are concealed). The
trial testimony authorized the jury to find that Lujan’s story
was implausible, that he had initially withheld his status as a
CI from the Immigration inspector, and that he had disobeyed the
DEA task- force agents with whom he had been working when he
drove the Bronco into Mexico. That Lujan and Acosta attempted to
proceed through the port of entry in a “lead car/load car”
procession also supported a finding that Lujan knew of the hidden
marijuana. See United States v. Mendoza, F.3d (5th Cir.
Aug. 29, 2000, No. 99-50556), 2000 WL 1224728 at *1, and

-- 2 of 3 --

No. 00-50148
-3-
citations therein. Collectively, these circumstantial factors
supported the jury’s conclusion that Lujan knew that the
marijuana was secreted in the Bronco. See United States v.
Jones, 185 F.3d 459, 464 (5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 2000 WL
798526 (U.S. Oct. 2, 2000) (No. 99-9910).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --