902 F.2d 1580
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Felix LARA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 89-30283.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 10, 1990.*
Decided May 16, 1990.
Before JAMES R. BROWNING, ALARCON and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
1. At trial, the government presented evidence, largely through the testimony of confidential informant Diaz, that: (1) defendant Lara sold Diaz one ounce of cocaine; (2) Lara knew Diaz was looking to buy a large quantity of heroin; (3) Lara identified Arreolla to Diaz as his supplier; (3) Arreolla later sold cocaine and heroin to Diaz; (4) Arreolla told Diaz that Lara worked for him; and (5) mail addressed to Lara was found in Arreolla's apartment. The jury convicted Lara on two counts--distributing cocaine within 300 feet of a public elementary school, and conspiracy (with Arreolla) to distribute cocaine and heroin. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, a rational jury could have concluded Lara was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, although it need not have done so. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19 (1979).
2. Because the conspiracy conviction is valid and there was evidence that Lara knew Diaz was looking to buy a substantial quantity of heroin, the court did not err in relying on the 375 grams of heroin sold by Arreolla to Diaz in setting Lara's base offense level. See United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, Sec. 1B1.3(a)(1), application note 1 (base offense level shall be determined on the basis of, inter alia, conduct of others in furtherance of the conspiracy "that was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant"). See also id. Sec. 2D1.4, application note 1.
AFFIRMED.