United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-40728
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE EPIFANIO ELIZARRARAZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-02-CR-781-ALL
--------------------
Before GARZA, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Epifanio Elizarraraz appeals his jury-trial conviction
on four counts of transporting illegal aliens, conspiracy, and
aiding and abetting in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A).
Elizarraraz argues that the district court abused its discretion
in allowing improper opinion testimony by a law enforcement agent
and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his
convictions.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 03-40728
-2-
Contrary to Elizarraraz’s contentions, the law enforcement
agent who testified at his trial did not offer profile evidence
or improper opinions regarding his guilty knowledge of the
presence of the illegal aliens in the trailer of his tractor-
trailer. The agent offered his analysis of the evidence found in
Elizarraraz’s case in the light of his special knowledge of alien
smuggling. See United States v. Speer, 30 F.3d 605, 610 & n.3
(5th Cir. 1994). Such testimony was admissible and the district
court did not abuse its discretion in allowing it. See id.
In asserting that the evidence was insufficient, Elizarraraz
challenges the guilty-knowledge elements of the crimes of
conviction. Elizarraraz’s control of the tractor-trailer,
considered together with the evidence of his failure to seal or
lock his load, his nervous behavior, his inconsistent statement
about his home address, the testimony of the aliens, and the
testimony of the agent describing a typical alien-smuggling
operation, was sufficient evidence from which the jury could
infer Elizarraraz’s guilty knowledge. See United States v.
Pennington, 20 F.3d 593, 598 (5th Cir. 1994).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the
Government and giving the Government the benefit of all
reasonable inferences, there is sufficient evidence from which
the jury could infer that Elizarraraz knew that the illegal
aliens were in the trailer of his tractor-trailer and that he
knowingly participated in and aided and abetted an alien-
No. 03-40728
-3-
smuggling conspiracy. See id. at 597-99. Because “a reasonable
trier of fact could [have] f[ou]nd that the evidence
establishe[d] guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,” Elizarraraz’s
insufficiency-of-the-evidence claim fails. See United States v.
Bell, 678 F.2d 547, 549 (5th Cir. Unit B 1982) (en banc), aff’d,
462 U.S. 356 (1983).
Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.