UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 99-41275
Summary Calendar
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RUBEN GOMEZ-MONTELONGO,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(M-99-CR-204-1)
_________________________________________________________________
July 24, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ruben Gomez-Montelongo was convicted by a jury for importation
of, and possession with intent to distribute, more than five
kilograms of cocaine. According to Gomez, the evidence was
insufficient to support his conviction because the cocaine was
concealed inside one of the fuel tanks for the vehicle he was
driving and the Government failed to prove he knew the cocaine was
there.
Knowledge of the presence of a controlled substance may be
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
inferred from the exercise of control over a vehicle in which the
substance is concealed. E.g., United States v. Diaz-Carreon, 915
F.2d 951, 954 (5th Cir. 1990). If the contraband is concealed in
a hidden compartment, control of the vehicle does not by itself
support an inference of guilty knowledge; there must be “additional
evidence indicating knowledge”. Id.
Based on the circumstantial evidence, including Gomez’s
nervousness and avoidance of eye contact with the primary Customs
Inspector, deliberately turning his back on the search, his claimed
ownership of the vehicle in which the cocaine was concealed, the
recent, significant alterations of the vehicle to accommodate the
concealment of contraband, and the very large amount of cocaine he
was carrying, a rational trier of fact could have found that Gomez
had knowledge of the presence of the cocaine concealed in the
truck. See United States v. Ramos-Garcia, 184 F.3d 463, 465 (5th
Cir. 1999)(implausibility of defendant being entrusted with large
quantity of marijuana without his knowledge is circumstantial
evidence of guilty knowledge); United States v. Ortega Reyna, 148
F.3d 540, 544 (5th Cir. 1998) (listing types of behavior recognized
as circumstantial evidence of guilty knowledge, including
nervousness, avoidance of eye contact, and alterations to the
vehicle); United States v. Resio-Trejo, 45 F.3d 907, 913 (5th Cir.
1995) (defendant’s calm demeanor and indifference while agents
dismantled gas tanks on his truck was circumstantial evidence of
2
guilty knowledge).
AFFIRMED
3