US v. Eric Araujo Flore

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cr-00320-LO-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000027867]. [16-4360]

Appeal: 16-4360

Doc: 41

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4360

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ERIC NOE ARAUJO FLORES, a/k/a Eric Orellano Arujo, a/k/a
Eric Orellana Arujo,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Liam O’Grady, District
Judge. (1:15-cr-00320-LO-1)

Submitted:

February 15, 2017

Decided:

February 22, 2017

Before AGEE, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph R. Conte, LAW OFFICE OF J. R. CONTE, Washington, D.C.;
Charles J. Soschin, LAW OFFICE OF C. J. SOSCHIN, Washington,
D.C., for Appellant.
Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney,
Michael J. Frank, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-4360

Doc: 41

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Eric Noe Araujo Flores was convicted by a jury of four
counts of sex trafficking of a child, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1591(a) (2012) (sex trafficking convictions); three counts of
foreign travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct,
in

violation

of

18

U.S.C.

§

2423(b)

(2012)

(foreign

travel

convictions); one count of coercion and enticement, in violation
of

18

U.S.C.

§

2422(b)

(2012)

(coercion

and

enticement

convictions); and one count of harboring an alien for an immoral
purpose, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1328 (2012), and he was
sentenced to 300 months in prison.

Flores asserts that the

Government presented insufficient evidence to support his sex
trafficking,
convictions.

foreign

travel,

and

coercion

and

enticement

Finding no error, we affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s denial of a Fed. R.
Crim. P. 29 motion for judgment of acquittal.

United States v.

Reed, 780 F.3d 260, 269 (4th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Cannon
v.

United

challenging
burden[.]”

States,
the

136

S.

sufficiency

Ct.
of

112
the

(2015).
evidence

A
faces

defendant
“a

heavy

United States v. McLean, 715 F.3d 129, 137 (4th Cir.

2013) (internal quotation marks omitted).

The jury verdict must

be sustained if “there is substantial evidence in the record,
when viewed in the light most favorable to the government, to
support the conviction.”

United States v. Jaensch, 665 F.3d 83,
2

Appeal: 16-4360

93

Doc: 41

(4th

Cir.

Filed: 02/22/2017

2011)

Pg: 3 of 3

(internal

quotation

marks

omitted).

“Substantial evidence is evidence that a reasonable finder of
fact

could

accept

as

adequate

and

sufficient

to

support

a

conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Id. (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted).

In fact,

“[r]eversal for insufficient evidence is reserved for the rare
case where the prosecution’s failure is clear.”

United States

v. Ashley, 606 F.3d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation
marks omitted).

We have reviewed the record and conclude that,

viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, there was
substantial evidence to support Flores’ convictions.
Based
judgment.
legal
before

on

the

foregoing,

we

affirm

the

district

court’s

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

3