UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-50253 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:16-cr-00390- RGK-12 ALEXIS JAIMEZ, AKA Alexis Dominic Jaimez, AKA Alexis Dominica Jaimez, AKA Lex, AKA OPINION Lil Travieso, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted May 17, 2022 Pasadena, California

Filed August 23, 2022

Before: John B. Owens and Daniel A. Bress, Circuit Judges, and Sidney A. Fitzwater, * District Judge.

Opinion by Judge Bress; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Owens

* The Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation. 2 UNITED STATES V. JAIMEZ

SUMMARY **

Criminal Law

Affirming Alexis Jaimez’s convictions for conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, money laundering conspiracy, and RICO conspiracy, the panel held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions and that Jaimez’s challenges to the jury instructions lacked merit.

The evidence at trial showed that Jaimez was a “foot soldier” for the Canta Ranas Organization, or CRO, a violent street gang. The panel held that sufficient evidence supported Jaimez’s conviction for conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance (methamphetamine), in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Specifically, there was sufficient evidence that Jaimez joined the gang’s drug distribution conspiracy knowing its scope and object and intending to help accomplish its purpose.

The panel held that sufficient evidence supported Jaimez’s conviction for money laundering conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h), which required the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was an agreement to commit money laundering, the defendant knew the objective of the agreement, and the defendant joined the agreement with the intent to further its unlawful purpose. Jaimez did not dispute that the CRO conspired to launder money by transferring extortionate “taxes” collected by foot soldiers to incarcerated gang leaders. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. UNITED STATES V. JAIMEZ 3 the government, the panel concluded that there was sufficient evidence that Jaimez himself knew of and intended to support the CRO’s money laundering, and that he was not convicted solely on the basis of his CRO membership.

The panel held that, as related to the money laundering conspiracy charge, the district court did not plainly err in instructing the jury, in the course of generally defining the term “knowingly,” that the government was “not required to prove that the defendant knew that his acts or omissions were unlawful.”

The panel held that sufficient evidence supported Jaimez’s conviction for RICO conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), which required the government to present adequate proof of an overall conspiracy to participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the RICO enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering. A pattern of racketeering activity requires proving at least two predicate acts of racketeering. The panel held that because there was sufficient evidence for the drug distribution and money laundering conspiracies, at least two RICO predicates were sufficiently esta