UNITED STATES v. MORRIS (2019)

Jennifer Alexandria Morris was convicted by a jury of three counts of transporting aliens within the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii). She now appeals her convictions and challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her convictions. Specifically, Morris challenges the sufficiency of the evidence indicating that she knew the truck she was driving contained six concealed aliens or that she was transporting them with the intent to further their unlawful presence.

Reviewing Morris’s preserved challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, we affirm. See United States v. Jimenez-Elvirez, 862 F.3d 527, 533 (5th Cir. 2017). Based on the circumstantial evidence presented at trial, including (1) testimony from two of the concealed aliens regarding the driver change before the truck reached an immigration checkpoint, (2) testimony from two of the concealed aliens indicating that they heard a female’s voice during the driver exchange, and (3) testimony from a Border Patrol agent regarding Morris’s nervous behavior at the checkpoint, a rational jury could have found the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Nolasco-Rosas, 286 F.3d 762, 765 (5th Cir. 2002) (per curiam). In light of the standard of review, Morris’s arguments to the contrary are unpersuasive. See id.

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.