## Facts

- From fall 1998 to at least summer 2000, William Eliu Martinez participated in an international cocaine trafficking conspiracy moving cocaine from Colombia to El Salvador and then north through Guatemala and Mexico toward the United States.
- Martinez, a former Salvadoran government official, joined after being approached by “Chino,” who connected him to members of the Otto Herrera Drug Trafficking Organization.
- Martinez knew the enterprise involved international cocaine trafficking and supervised major operational steps in El Salvador, including receiving cocaine, transferring loads from large vessels to smaller boats, arranging secure storage, and reloading cocaine onto trucks for overland shipment.
- He recruited, supervised, paid, and sometimes threatened workers involved in these steps.
- On March 16, 1999, DEA agents and Guatemalan officials intercepted three trucks in Guatemala and seized more than 2,500 kilograms of cocaine valued at over $10 million.
- After arrest, Martinez made voluntary statements to DEA agents acknowledging his role and describing parts of the operation.
- A federal grand jury charged Martinez with distributing cocaine outside the United States knowing or intending it would be unlawfully imported into the United States, and with related conspiracy offenses under 21 U.S.C. § 959(a) and related provisions.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Martinez knew or intended the cocaine would be unlawfully imported into the United States, as required by 21 U.S.C. § 959(a).
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence that co-conspirators murdered a potential witness to procure his unavailability, including under forfeiture-by-wrongdoing and Rule 403 balancing.
3. Whether the jury instructions on § 959’s mens rea and conspiracy elements accurately stated the law and preserved the government’s burden of proof.

## Decision

- The court affirmed Martinez’s convictions and 29-year sentence.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find Martinez knew or intended the cocaine was destined for unlawful importation into the United States.
- The court held the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of co-conspirator violence related to the conspiracy and witness unavailability.
- The court held the jury instructions, read as a whole, accurately required proof that Martinez knew or intended U.S. importation and did not mislead the jury or reduce the burden of proof.

## Legal Principles

- Under 21 U.S.C. § 959(a), the government must prove the defendant manufactured or distributed a controlled substance outside the United States while knowing or intending it would be unlawfully imported into the United States.
- Knowledge or intent under § 959(a) may be established through circumstantial evidence, including the trafficking route, scale and organization of the enterprise, and the defendant’s managerial role and admissions.
- Evidence of violent acts by co-conspirators may be admissible when relevant to the conspiracy’s operation and witness-related conduct, subject to trial-court discretion and Rule 403 balancing.
- Jury instructions are upheld when, considered in their entirety, they clearly require the statutory mens rea and do not dilute the prosecution’s obligation to prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit upheld Martinez’s international drug trafficking convictions, concluding that the government permissibly proved § 959(a)’s U.S.-importation knowledge/intent element through circumstantial evidence tied to the conspiracy’s route, scale, and Martinez’s leadership role, and that the trial court’s evidentiary rulings and jury instructions were legally sound.


United States v. Martinez, 476 F.3d 961 (D.C. Cir. 2007)