## Facts

- Federal investigators used a confidential informant and a DEA agent acting undercover as supposed drug traffickers.
- The government’s proof at trial consisted primarily of the undercover agent’s testimony, supported by recorded calls and transcripts of conversations with Jorge Alberto Paret-Ruiz.
- Paret-Ruiz told the informant he was looking for a boat to transport drugs from Caribbean islands to Puerto Rico.
- In recorded conversations, Paret-Ruiz referred to unspecified “individuals” who purportedly would supply or arrange cocaine and, at times, suggested the undercover agent could show them a boat.
- Paret-Ruiz did not identify these alleged third parties, and the undercover agent did not meet, verify, or independently corroborate their existence or role.
- The undercover agent gave Paret-Ruiz $2,000 to fund travel to Antigua to confirm drug availability; the government relied on these discussions and arrangements as evidence of conspiracy.
- No drugs were seized, and no non-government co-conspirator was identified or linked by physical evidence to the charged conspiracies.
- A jury in the District of Puerto Rico convicted Paret-Ruiz of (1) conspiracy to import with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine and (2) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute the same quantity.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Paret-Ruiz knowingly joined an agreement to import and possess with intent to distribute cocaine with at least one non-government participant.
2. Whether the district court should have granted a new trial based on newly discovered evidence and alleged suppression of exculpatory evidence.
3. Whether the prosecutor improperly suggested the jury could convict based solely on an agreement with a government agent.

## Decision

- The First Circuit reversed the convictions and remanded with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal.
- The court held the evidence legally insufficient to prove a conspiracy because the government failed to show an agreement between Paret-Ruiz and any non-government co-conspirator.
- The court declined to reach the new-trial/Brady and improper-argument claims because the insufficiency ruling required acquittal.

## Legal Principles

- A conspiracy requires proof of an agreement, the defendant’s knowing and voluntary participation, and at least one co-conspirator who is not a government agent or informant acting for the government.
- As a matter of law, a defendant cannot be convicted of conspiracy based only on an agreement with a government agent.
- On sufficiency review, evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, but convictions cannot rest on speculation or uncorroborated, ambiguous assertions.
- References to unnamed third parties, without independent evidence establishing their existence and assent to the criminal plan, may be inadequate to prove the required “meeting of the minds.”
- Preparatory discussions or exploratory negotiations with undercover agents do not, without proof of a real non-government participant’s agreement, establish a criminal conspiracy.

## Conclusion

The First Circuit set aside Paret-Ruiz’s drug conspiracy convictions because the government’s case, built largely on undercover conversations and Paret-Ruiz’s unverified references to unidentified “individuals,” did not prove an actual agreement with any non-government co-conspirator, requiring entry of a judgment of acquittal.


United States v. Paret-Ruiz, 567 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2009)