Page 47 - May June 2019 TPA Journal

Tinajero, who on multiple occasions drove a the existence of the agreement, and (3) the
tractor-trailer to Perez-Tinajero’s home in Dallas defendant voluntarily participated in the
to purchase cocaine, which he then transported conspiracy.” “Mere presence at the scene of a
back to New York for resale. In April 2015, the crime or close association with a co-conspirator
cameras emplaced by the DEA outside Perez- will not support an inference of participation in a
Tinajero’s home filmed Gonzalez, also from New conspiracy. . . . However, an agreement may be
York, accompanying Reyes into one such inferred from a concert of action . . . [and] the
meeting. After Reyes and Gonzalez departed the development and collocation of circumstances.”
home, a traffic stop by local police discovered Additionally, the defendant need only enter into
approximately three kilograms of cocaine hidden an agreement with one other person and “need not
in a concealed compartment of the tractor-trailer, know each of the other conspirators or each part
and both men were arrested. In total, eighteen of the unlawful scheme.”
individuals were indicted in connection with the
investigation, though only Gonzalez and one other Gonzalez raises several arguments as to why the
individual went to trial. evidence was insufficient for him to be convicted
of participating in the conspiracy. None of them
At Gonzalez’s trial, Perez-Tinajero testified that have merit. First, Gonzalez asserts that he lacked
Gonzalez was involved in the transaction to the background of someone who would conspire
purchase cocaine at her residence, and that he had to distribute cocaine. This argument is entirely
urged her to “front” (i.e. loan on consignment) irrelevant as to the sufficiency of the evidence on
Reyes and himself the third kilogram of cocaine— which he was convicted.
in addition to the two kilograms that they
purchased with $56,000 in cash. The government Second, Gonzalez asserts that many of the co-
also produced evidence that Perez-Tinjero’s hub conspirators testified that they did not know him.
of the conspiracy in Dallas was responsible for That argument lacks merit, given that all members
distributing at least 450 kilograms of cocaine. of a conspiracy are not required to know every
Gonzalez’s motion for a judgment of acquittal was other member for a conspiracy to exist, and that it
denied. The jury found beyond a reasonable doubt is not surprising that some members in a large
that Gonzalez was guilty of conspiracy to possess conspiracy would not know each other.
cocaine with the intent to distribute. The jury also
And third, Gonzalez asserts that Perez-Tinajero’s
found beyond a reasonable doubt that Gonzalez
testimony was biased because she had pleaded
was directly involved with, or should reasonably
guilty to the conspiracy and was a cooperating
have foreseen that the conspiracy involved, five or
witness. That argument also lacks merit, as
more kilograms of cocaine.
witness credibility is the province of the jury, and
(Ed. note: Discussion of the sentencing guideline a conspirator’s guilty verdict can be based on the
appeal is omitted.) testimony of co-conspirators even if they were
offered leniency in exchange for their testimony.
Gonzalez argues that the evidence introduced at
trial was insufficient for a jury to convict him of There was ample evidence introduced at trial by
participating in a conspiracy to distribute cocaine. which a jury could find, beyond a reasonable
To sustain a conviction for conspiracy to doubt, that Gonzalez was involved in a conspiracy
distribute drugs, the government must prove to distribute cocaine. That evidence included his
beyond a reasonable doubt that: “(1) an agreement presence in a conspirator’s vehicle when it
existed between two or more persons to violate contained multiple kilograms of cocaine hidden in
federal narcotics law, (2) the defendant knew of a secret compartment; camera footage of him
entering a home used by the conspirators to

May/June 2019 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • 866-997-8282 43