Sufficiency of Evidence

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Juan Amaya

Case No.: 14-2617

Officials: EASTERBROOK, KANNE, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sufficiency of Evidence

Evidence more than sufficient to support jury verdict in multiple-count indictment

“Amaya argues that the government relied heavily at trial on the rules governing the Latin Kings and in particular the Latin Kings in the Little Village neighborhood, but failed to show that Amaya himself actually agreed to abide by those rules. Pressing that argument, Amaya notes there was evi‐ dence that gang members did not always follow all of the rules. But Amaya ignores that two former Latin Kings—again, Caquias and Shanna—testified that Amaya, as Regional Inca, was in charge of enforcing the rules. The jury was entitled to credit that testimony and conclude that Amaya agreed to the rules. See Garcia, 754 F.3d at 471 (considering “documentary evidence of the gang’s rules” as evidence that the Latin Kings’ Corona participated in a RICO conspiracy). The rules man‐ dated the shooting of trespassers, killing of police coopera‐ tors, retaliatory shooting of rival gang members, and beatings of Latin Kings who broke the rules. And though Amaya ar‐ gues there were instances in which gang members failed to follow the rules, he ignores the evidence of instances in which the rules were followed. In particular, Amaya took credit for twenty‐six shootings of rival gang members that took place while he was Regional Inca.”

Affirmed

Full Text