United States v. Sandoval

• Decision Date: 07 July 2021
• Docket Number: No. 18-2177, 19-1026,No. 18-1993, No. 18-2165,18-1993
• Citation: 6 F.4th 63
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Herzzon SANDOVAL, a/k/a Casper, Defendant, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Edwin Guzman, a/k/a Playa, Defendant, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Erick Argueta Larios, a/k/a Lobo, Defendant, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Cesar Martinez, a/k/a Cheche, Defendant, Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

6 F.4th 63

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,

v.Herzzon SANDOVAL, a/k/a Casper, Defendant, Appellant.

United States of America, Appellee,

v.Edwin Guzman, a/k/a Playa, Defendant, Appellant.

United States of America, Appellee,

v.Erick Argueta Larios, a/k/a Lobo, Defendant, Appellant.

United States of America, Appellee,

v.Cesar Martinez, a/k/a Cheche, Defendant, Appellant.

No. 18-1993

No. 18-2165

No. 18-2177

19-1026

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

July 7, 2021

Madeleine K. Rodriguez, with whom Martin F. Murphy, Christian A. Garcia, and Foley Hoag LLP were on brief, for appellant Herzzon Sandoval.

Michael R. Schneider, with whom Good Schneider Cormier & Fried was on brief, for appellant Edwin Guzman.

Thomas J. Iovieno on brief for appellant Erick Argueta Larios.

Stephen Paul Maidman for appellant Cesar Martinez.

Mark T. Quinlivan, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Andrew E. Lelling, United States Attorney, was on brief, for appellee.

Before Lynch, Selya, and Barron, Circuit Judges.

BARRON, Circuit Judge.

In these consolidated appeals, Herzzon Sandoval, Edwin Guzman, Erick Argueta Larios, and Cesar Martinez challenge their federal convictions and sentences, which stem from a wide-ranging federal criminal investigation into La Mara Salvatrucha ("MS-13") in Massachusetts. We affirm.

I.

MS-13 is a transnational criminal organization based in El Salvador. In the United States, MS-13 is organized into small local groups called "cliques." The Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), the Massachusetts State Police ("MSP"), and other law enforcement agencies (together, "the Task Force") began an investigation into MS-13 cliques in Massachusetts in 2012.

As part of this investigation, the FBI developed a cooperating witness, "CW-1," who was able to become a member of the "Eastside Loco Salvatrucha," or "ESLS," which is based in Everett, Massachusetts and held regular meetings at a garage there. Through CW-1's recordings and surveillance, the Task Force identified Sandoval, Guzman, Larios, and Martinez as ESLS members and ESLS as an MS-13 clique. It also identified Sandoval and Guzman as the "runners" of ESLS, with Sandoval as the group's undisputed leader and "first word" and Guzman as the group's "second word." The Task Force identified Larios and Martinez as ESLS "homeboys," or full members of the group.

The Task Force determined that a person became a member of ESLS by being "jumped in" or "beaten in" -- a process that involves members forming a circle and beating the individual while someone counts to thirteen. The Task Force also learned, largely through CW-1's recordings and surveillance, of multiple stabbings and attacks, and at least one murder, against MS-13 rivals -- or "chavalas" -- in which ESLS members were allegedly involved.

In investigating the MS-13 cliques in Massachusetts, the Task Force used an undercover technique known as a "protection detail." Pursuant to this technique, CW-1 would recruit an individual to protect drug shipments that CW-1 transported from Massachusetts to New Hampshire, in exchange for five hundred dollars. CW-1 recruited both Larios and Martinez for drug protection details.

On May 15, 2017, a federal grand jury in the District of Massachusetts returned a fifth superseding indictment ("FSI") related to the Task Force's investigation. This indictment charged over fifty individuals with federal crimes, including the four defendants who bring the present appeals.

The indictment charged Sandoval, Guzman, Larios, and Martinez with violating 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), which makes it a crime to conspire to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. The indictment identified the conspiracy with which each of these defendants was charged as one that sought to violate § 1962(c) of RICO. That provision makes it "unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity." Id.

"[R]acketeering activity" includes, among other things, "any act or threat involving murder ... which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year." 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). The indictment specified that the agreed-upon pattern of activity for each defendant consisted of the following acts "involving murder": murder, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 265, § 1 ; assault with intent to murder, id. § 15; attempt to murder, id. § 16; armed assault with intent to murder, id. § 18; and conspiracy to commit murder, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 274, § 7. The indictment also charged both Larios and Martinez with an additional crime -- conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846.

On April 6, 2017, the District Court established four separate trial groups for the defendants charged in the FSI. Sandoval, Guzman, Larios, and Martinez were placed in trial group three, which meant that they would be tried jointly.

The joint trial of these four defendants began on January 30, 2018. The jury heard testimony from members of the Task Force and from two cooperating defendants -- Jose Hernandez Miguel ("Hernandez Miguel") and Mauricio Sanchez ("Sanchez") -- who had been ESLS homeboys. The government's case also included recordings -- both audio and video -- that CW-1 had made of ESLS meetings and conversations with MS-13 members.

After fifteen days of trial and four days of deliberation, the jury convicted Sandoval, Guzman, and Larios of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) but acquitted Martinez on the count that charged him with that crime. The jury's verdict finding Sandoval, Guzman, and Larios guilty of committing that offense did not specify which racketeering acts the jury had found each of these defendants had agreed would be committed.

The jury found Martinez guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine, finding five-hundred grams or more attributable to and reasonably foreseeable to him. The jury did not, however, find Larios guilty on the count that charged him with committing that offense.

The District Court entered the judgments of conviction and sentenced the defendants in late 2018. Sandoval received a sentence of 240 months' imprisonment and 3 years of supervised release; Guzman, 192 months' imprisonment and 3 years of supervised release; Larios, 180 months' imprisonment and 3 years of supervised release; and Martinez, 72 months' imprisonment and 5 years of supervised release.

II.

We begin with the sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenges that Sandoval, Guzman, and Larios bring to their respective convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d). We conclude that these challenges are without merit.

A.

To secure a conviction for committing the RICO conspiracy offense at issue for each defendant, the government was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant "knowingly joined the conspiracy, agreeing with one or more coconspirators 'to further [an] endeavor which, if completed, would satisfy all the elements of" the predicate RICO offense. United States v. Rodríguez-Torres, 939 F.3d 16, 23 (1st Cir. 2019) (quoting Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52, 65, 118 S.Ct. 469, 139 L.Ed.2d 352 (1997) ). Section 1962(c) is the predicate RICO offense for the RICO conspiracy offense that each defendant was charged with committing, and it contains three main elements: "(1) the conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern of racketeering activity," Salinas, 522 U.S. at 62, 118 S.Ct. 469.

The "pattern of racketeering" element of that offense "requires at least two acts of racketeering activity" within ten years of each other. 18 U.S.C. § 1961(5). Thus, to prove the RICO conspiracy charge at issue for each defendant, the government was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that each "agreed that at least two acts of racketeering would be committed in furtherance of the conspiracy." United States v. Leoner-Aguirre, 939 F.3d 310, 317 (1st Cir. 2019).

The government contends that a rational jury could conclude from the evidence in the record that Sandoval, Guzman, and Larios each agreed that at least two acts of racketeering would be committed in furtherance of the conspiracy charged. In support of this contention, the government relies on the evidence in the record that pertains both to each defendant's ties to ESLS and to ESLS being an MS-13 clique whose mission was for its members to attack and kill rivals. In the government's view, the evidence of the ties between each defendant and ESLS, when combined with the evidence of ESLS's murderous mission and connection to MS-13 as well as the evidence that the government introduced about the nature of MS-13 itself, suffices to permit a reasonable juror to find beyond a reasonable doubt that each defendant had entered into the requisite agreement with respect to racketeering acts involving murder.

After the government presented its case-in-chief, Sandoval, Guzman, and Larios moved for judgment of acquittal on the counts charging them with conspiring to violate § 1962(c). Fed. R. Crim. P. 29(a). Then, at the close of all evidence, the District Court deemed these defendants to have renewed their motions for judgment of acquittal. The District Court ultimately denied the motions.

We review preserved challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo. See United States v. McLellan, 959 F.3d 442, 457 (1st Cir. 2020). We consider the evidence in the record in the light most favorable to the jury's guilty verdict, Rodríguez-Torres, 939 F.3d at 29, and inquire whether on that view of the record "no levelheaded jury could have found [the defendants] guilty," United States v. Guerrier, 669 F.3d 1, 7 (1st Cir. 2011).

B.

We begin with Sandoval's sufficiency challenge. He does not dispute that the evidence...