Case: 12-16257 Date Filed: 07/31/2013 Page: 1 of 6
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-16257
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:12-cr-00022-JSM-EAJ-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALFREDO CORONADO,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(July 31, 2013)
Before CARNES, BARKETT, and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Alfredo Coronado appeals his convictions for conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21
Case: 12-16257 Date Filed: 07/31/2013 Page: 2 of 6
U.S.C. § 846 (Count 1), and possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more
of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii) and 18
U.S.C. § 2 (Count 4). For the reasons set forth below, we affirm Coronado’s
convictions.
I.
At trial, several of Coronado’s codefendants testified that they had assisted
Coronado in distributing methamphetamine to others or knew that Coronado had
distributed methamphetamine to others. Henry Corona, Coronado’s nephew,
testified that he provided Coronado with methamphetamine that Corona had
obtained from a Georgia drug supplier and that Coronado assisted Corona in his
dealings with the supplier. Following the two-day trial, the jury found Coronado
guilty of Counts 1 and 4. The court sentenced Coronado to a total sentence of 240
months’ imprisonment.
II.
On appeal, Coronado argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his
convictions as to Counts 1 and 4. Coronado acknowledges that his codefendants
testified that Coronado supplied methamphetamine to others, but he challenges the
credibility of that testimony. Coronado further argues that there is no reliable
evidence that he ever possessed methamphetamine or intended to distribute
methamphetamine.
2
Case: 12-16257 Date Filed: 07/31/2013 Page: 3 of 6
We review both a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence and the
district court’s denial of a Fed.R.Crim.P. 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal de
novo. United States v. Gamory, 635 F.3d 480, 497 (11th Cir. 2011). In
considering the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light most
favorable to the government, with all inferences and credibility choices made in the
government’s favor, and affirm the conviction if, based on this evidence, a
reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Id. It is not necessary that the evidence presented at trial excludes every
reasonable hypothesis of innocence or is wholly inconsistent with every conclusion
except that of a defendant’s guilt. Id. We are “bound by the jury’s credibility
choices, and by its rejection of the inferences raised by the defendant.” United
States v. Peters, 403 F.3d 1263, 1268 (11th Cir. 2005).
To sustain a conviction for conspiracy to distribute drugs, the government
must prove that “1) an agreement existed between two or more people to distribute
the drugs; 2) that the defendant at issue knew of the conspiratorial goal; and 3) that
he knowingly joined or participated in the illegal venture.” United States v.
Brown, 587 F.3d 1082, 1089 (11th Cir. 2009) (quotation omitted). The
government does not need to show that the defendant knew all of the details or
participated in every aspect of the conspiracy, only that the defendant “knew the
essential nature of the conspiracy.” United States v. Garcia, 405 F.3d 1260, 1269-
3
Case: 12-16257 Date Filed: 07/31/2013 Page: 4 of 6
70 (11th Cir. 2005) (quotation omitted). Whether the defendant knowingly
volunteered to join the conspiracy may be proven by inferences from the conduct
of the alleged participants or from circumstantial evidence of a scheme. Id. at
1270.
To support a conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), the government must
establish that the defendant (1) knowingly (2) possessed methamphetamine
(3) with intent to distribute it. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1); United States v. Faust,
456 F.3d 1342, 1345 (11th Cir. 2006). Knowledge, possession, and intent can be
proved by direct or circumstantial evidence. United States v. Poole, 878 F.2d
1389, 1391-92 (11th Cir. 1989). Intent to distribute can be proved circumstantially
from the quantity of drugs. Id. at 1392.
Here, the evidence was sufficient to support Coronado’s conviction for
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of
methamphetamine. Corona testified that he gave quantities of methamphetamine
to Coronado to sell and that Coronado assisted Corona in his dealings with a
Georgia drug supplier. Additionally, Corona testified that Coronado sold the
methamphetamine Corona gave him to others. Corona further testified that, on
October 18, 2011, Coronado received 8 ounces, or 224 grams, of
methamphetamine from the Georgia drug supplier, and Coronado and Robert
Harrelson were going to sell that methamphetamine. Coronado’s codefendants’
4
Case: 12-16257 Date Filed: 07/31/2013 Page: 5 of 6
testimony corroborated Corona’s testimony. Based on this evidence, a jury could
conclude that Coronado agreed with Corona and others to possess with the intent to
distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. Coronado knowingly
participated in the conspiracy by meeting with the drug supplier and selling the
methamphetamine to others. Thus, the evidence was sufficient for the jury to have
found Coronado guilty of conspiracy.
The evidence was also sufficient to support Coronado’s conviction for
possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. As
discussed above, the testimony showed that, on October 18, Coronado received
methamphetamine, and he and Harrelson left together in a truck to sell that
methamphetamine. Law enforcement later stopped Harrelson’s truck and
discovered the eight ounces of methamphetamine, which was packaged in eight
separate bags, each of which contained one ounce of the drug. Trial testimony
showed that the quantity of methamphetamine discovered was consistent with
quantities commonly used for distribution, and intent to distribute can be proven
circumstantially from the quantity of drugs. See Poole, 878 F.2d at 1392. Thus,
the evidence showed that Coronado possessed with the intent to distribute 50
grams or more of methamphetamine. To the extent Coronado argues that his
codefendants’ testimony was not credible, we are bound by the jury’s credibility
choices and view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. See
5
Case: 12-16257 Date Filed: 07/31/2013 Page: 6 of 6
Peters, 403 F.3d at 1268; Gamory, 635 F.3d at 497. Thus, the evidence was
sufficient to support Coronado’s convictions.
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Coronado’s convictions.
AFFIRMED.
6