United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 3, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-50050
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
HOWARD GERALD PARHAM,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:03-CR-2274-ALL
--------------------
Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Howard Gerald Parham appeals his conviction of possessing
with the intent to distribute marijuana. Parham challenges the
sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. He argues
that the Government failed to establish that he knew about the
marijuana secreted in the tractor-trailer he driving. See 21
U.S.C § 841(a)(1).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-50050
-2-
At trial, the Government established that Parham had sole
ownership and control over the tractor-trailer in which the
marijuana was found. In addition, the Government presented
circumstantial evidence of Parham’s guilty knowledge. See United
States v. Villarreal, 324 F.3d 319, 324 (5th Cir. 2003). A
Border Patrol agent testified that Parham was nervous at the
primary inspection area and seemed distracted by a drug-sniffing
canine near his trailer. See United States v. Ortega Reyna, 148
F.3d 540, 544 (5th Cir. 1998) (holding that nervousness is
recognized as circumstantial evidence of guilty knowledge).
Parham also made inconsistent statements as to why his trailer
was sealed with a green seal from his own supply rather than with
a seal from the company whose cargo he was transporting. See id.
(noting that inconsistent statements are recognized as
circumstantial evidence of guilty knowledge). Finally, testimony
established that the 634.5 pounds of marijuana found in Parham’s
trailer had a street value of at least $900 a pound. The jury
could have rationally inferred that Parham would not be entrusted
with such valuable cargo if he had not been a knowing participant
in a drug-smuggling scheme. See Villarreal, 324 F.3d at 324.
The evidence produced at Parham’s trial, viewed in the light
most favorable to the verdict, was sufficient to allow a
reasonable trier of fact to find that Parham knew about the
No. 05-50050
-3-
marijuana hidden in his tractor-trailer. See id. at 322. The
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.