United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 17, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-41092
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FRANCISCO JAVIER CRUZ-HERNANDEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:04-CR-288-1
--------------------
Before SMITH, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Francisco Javier Cruz-Hernandez (Cruz) appeals his
jury-trial convictions for conspiracy to possess with the intent
to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine, possession
with the intent to distribute more than five kilograms of
cocaine, and importation of more than five kilograms of cocaine.
Cruz argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew that cocaine was
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-41092
-2-
hidden in the fuel tanks in the tractor he was driving. He
contends that the evidence was, at best, in equipoise.
Although the jury may ordinarily infer the defendant’s
guilty knowledge from his control over a drug-laden vehicle, if
the drugs are contained in a hidden compartment, as in this case,
this court requires additional circumstantial evidence that
demonstrates guilty knowledge. United States v. Villarreal, 324
F.3d 319, 324 (5th Cir. 2003).
Cruz exhibited nervous behavior during the search of his
vehicle and during questioning. Based on the actions of Cruz in
this regard, the jury could have reasonably inferred that Cruz
was nervous concerning the discovery of cocaine in the tractor.
See United States v. Ortega Reyna, 148 F.3d 540, 544 (5th Cir.
1998). Cruz’s statements to the federal agents were inconsistent
with the evidence presented at trial. Further, his trial
testimony was inconsistent in several respects. Inconsistent
statements also provide evidence of guilty knowledge. United
States v. Diaz-Carreon, 915 F.2d 951, 954-55 (5th Cir. 1990).
Cruz also provided explanations and detailed situations that were
implausible, including claiming not to be concerned about a
broken fuel gauge. He also claimed that he was paid a salary as
a truck driver for a business conducted in a house with a small
office area where no one lived. Cruz stated that he did not make
many trips for the business and cleaned the house once or twice a
week before and between trips. Finally, the amount and value of
No. 04-41092
-3-
the cocaine discovered in the fuel tanks of the tractor in his
possession supports the jury’s finding of guilty knowledge. The
jury could have rationally inferred that Cruz would not be
entrusted with such valuable cargo if he had not been a knowing
participant in a drug-smuggling scheme. Villarreal, 324 F.3d at
324.
The evidence presented at trial was sufficient to allow a
rational jury to find that Cruz had knowledge of the cocaine in
his possession. Ortega Reyna, 148 F.3d at 543. Accordingly,
Cruz’s convictions are AFFIRMED.