United States v. 2020-08-13 | 18-10256 | USA V. JOSE VASQUEZ ROBLEDO | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

JOSE ALEJANDRO VASQUEZ
ROBLEDO, AKA Gusano,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 18-10256

D.C. No. 3:17-cr-00381-VC-2

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Vince Chhabria, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 11, 2020
**

San Francisco, California

Before: HAWKINS and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges, and BATAILLON,
***
District
Judge.

*
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).

***
The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, United States District Judge for the
District of Nebraska, sitting by designation.
FILED

AUG 13 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2
Jose Alejandro Vasquez Robledo (“Robledo”) appeals his conviction for
conspiracy to distribute fifty grams or more of methamphetamine and distribution
and possession with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of methamphetamine.
We affirm.
Assuming without deciding that the district court abused its discretion by
allowing the government to introduce evidence Robledo had previously sold
methamphetamine to codefendant Esparza, any alleged error did not materially
affect the verdict. See United States v. Torres, 794 F.3d 1053, 1063 (9th Cir. 2015).
The drug sale at issue was captured on video and audio by the confidential informant
(“CI”) and personally observed by ATF agents. The recordings showed Robledo
and Esparza meeting with the CI on the date of the sale. Shortly thereafter, Robledo
was recorded talking on the phone to the CI, telling him when the drugs would arrive,
and saying “his guy was coming right now” just as video showed Esparza arriving
on a bicycle. After Esparza and the CI exchanged the drugs and cash, ATF agents
watched Esparza ride back to Robledo and hand over the cash from the transaction.
Four separate witnesses—the CI, Esparza, and two agents—provided testimony
consistent with what appeared on the recordings, and contradicted Robledo’s
testimony he was merely trying to buy a gold chain, which was never mentioned on
any of the audio or video recordings. The evidence “overwhelmingly proved the

3
defendant’s guilt” and Robledo’s conviction therefore must stand. United States v.
Sine, 493 F.3d 1021, 1041 (9th Cir. 2007).
AFFIRMED.