IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-40530
(Summary Calendar)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JESUS GONZALEZ-TORRES,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(97-CR-278-2)
- - - - - - - - - -
February 15, 1999
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Jesus Gonzalez-Torres was convicted by a
jury of (1) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more
than 500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and,
(2) aiding and abetting in the possession with intent to distribute
more than 3.4 kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§
841(a)(1), 960(a)(1), (b)(2). He was sentenced after judgment was
entered consistent with the jury’s verdict. Gonzalez requests that
the judgment be reversed and a new trial ordered, arguing on appeal
that the verdict went against the great weight of evidence and that
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
the jury ignored the court’s instructions when it rendered a
verdict of guilty.
A jury verdict will be upheld on appeal if a rational trier of
fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a
reasonable doubt. United States v. Payne, 99 F.3d 1273, 1278 (5th
Cir. 1996). Gonzalez relies on the testimony of three co-
defendants, all of whom testified that Gonzalez was not involved in
the conspiracy. Thus, to reach a guilty verdict, the jury had to
have found the co-defendants’ testimony not credible. As the jury
is the final arbiter of witness credibility, United States v.
Restrepo, 994 F.2d 173, 182 (5th Cir. 1993), we resolve credibility
determinations in favor of the verdict. United States v. Resio-
Trejo, 45 F.3d 907, 911 (5th Cir. 1995).
Although there was testimony at trial supporting a conclusion
that Gonzalez was not guilty, there is also substantial evidence in
the record supporting the jury’s guilty verdict. See United States
v. Espinoza-Seanez, 862 F.2d 526, 536 (5th Cir. 1988)(holding that
there must be substantial evidence to uphold the verdict of the
jury). Specifically, (1) during post-arrest interviews, two of the
co-defendants implicated Gonzalez as the source of the cocaine, (2)
Gonzalez’s car was parked at the house where the drug transaction
was scheduled to be consummated, and (3) two kilograms of cocaine
were found in that car shortly after the transaction was
negotiated, at about the time the transaction was to take place.
As there is an evidentiary basis on which the verdict can be
supported, the judgment must be, and therefore is,
2
AFFIRMED.
3