United States v. Ramon Pacheco ( 2023 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 22-3108
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Ramon Diego Pacheco
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of Minnesota
____________
Submitted: April 26, 2023
Filed: May 5, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before KELLY, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Ramon Pacheco received a 198-month prison sentence after a jury found him
guilty of conspiring to distribute at least 50 grams of a mixture containing
methamphetamine. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), 846. He asks us to vacate
his conviction and sentence because the jury should not have been told about a prior
drug conviction, the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, and the district
court1 miscalculated how much actual methamphetamine he distributed.
We conclude there was no abuse of discretion in admitting the prior conviction
or denying a new trial. See United States v. Monds, 945 F.3d 1049, 1052 (8th Cir.
2019) (explaining that prior drug convictions can show “knowledge” and “intent”);
United States v. Clayton, 787 F.3d 929, 935 (8th Cir. 2015) (emphasizing that the
jury’s verdict should “stand unless the evidence weighs heavily enough against
[it] . . . that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred” (quotation marks omitted)).
Nor did the district court clearly err in calculating the drug quantity. See United
States v. Madison, 863 F.3d 1001, 1006 (8th Cir. 2017) (describing the “well-
established” procedure for determining the purity of unrecovered
methamphetamine). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Wilhelmina M. Wright, United States District Judge for the
District of Minnesota.
-2-