Circumstantial evidence is sufficient to support inference of defendant’s knowledge of conspiracy’s objective

SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE United States v. Isaac-Sigala, No. 05-2089, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. May 30, 2006). Appeal of convictions for aiding and abetting and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), § 841(b)(1)(D), § 846, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. HELD: Evidence reasonably supported jury’s inference that defendant knowingly advanced essential objectives of conspiracy to distribute marijuana where there was substantial evidence that defendant drove scout vehicle for drug smuggler but only circumstantial evidence indicated that defendant knew specific contents of smuggler’s van (i.e., marijuana). Read the opinion here.