## Facts

- Federal agents investigated a methamphetamine-trafficking operation in Batesville, Arkansas, beginning in late 2014.
- Elsa Solis lived with her children and her boyfriend, Ivan Pedraza; Pedraza’s brother, Fredy, used the residence in connection with meth production and distribution.
- Solis held title to a residence used in the operation and was the registered owner of multiple vehicles used by the Pedrazas in drug activity.
- During a controlled buy, Solis sat in the passenger seat while Pedraza sold methamphetamine to a confidential informant through the passenger window.
- Investigators tied Solis’s address to a package containing an air-conditioning unit stuffed with methamphetamine.
- Surveillance showed Pedraza and Fredy leaving Solis’s residence for drug sales and returning afterward.
- Intercepted calls included discussions between Solis and Pedraza about buying acetone, a substance associated with processing methamphetamine.
- On a trip to Dallas, Texas, Pedraza used one of Solis’s vehicles to drive Solis and two children while planning to purchase a large quantity of methamphetamine; intercepted communications referenced drug-filled car seats and Solis asking whether Pedraza had “fix[ed] everything.”

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
2. Whether a misprision conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 4, as applied, violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination when reporting would reasonably expose the defendant to prosecution for the underlying felony.
3. Whether the district court erred by refusing Solis’s requested “mere presence” jury instruction.

## Decision

- Affirmed the drug-trafficking convictions, holding that a rational jury could find knowing participation and intent based on Solis’s control of property and vehicles, presence during a sale, drug-linked shipments to her address, surveillance, and intercepted communications.
- Reversed the misprision conviction, holding that § 4 could not constitutionally be applied to require Solis to report a felony where doing so reasonably could lead to her own prosecution for that felony.
- Held the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining a separate “mere presence” instruction because the instructions as a whole adequately required proof of knowing participation and intent.

## Legal Principles

- Evidence is sufficient if, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination protects against compelled disclosures that would furnish a link in the chain of evidence leading to the speaker’s prosecution, where the risk of prosecution is reasonably apprehended.
- The misprision statute (18 U.S.C. § 4) cannot be applied to compel reporting of a felony when the reporting requirement would reasonably expose the defendant to prosecution for the same criminal conduct being concealed; the holding is as applied, not a facial invalidation.
- A district court may refuse a separate “mere presence” instruction when the jury instructions, taken as a whole, properly require proof of knowing participation and criminal intent.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit upheld Solis’s methamphetamine conspiracy and possession convictions based on substantial circumstantial and direct evidence of knowing involvement, but reversed her misprision conviction because the Fifth Amendment barred applying the reporting duty to conduct that would reasonably incriminate her in the underlying drug conspiracy.


United States v. Solis, 915 F.3d 1172 (8th Cir. 2019)