043579P.pdf   08/24/2005  United States  v.  Esequicio Londondio
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-3579
                          and No:  04-3585
                          and No:  04-3584
                          and No:  04-3582
                          and No:  04-3580
   District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED][Bowman, Author, with Riley and Benton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal Cases - criminal law. Multi-defendant drug conspiracy 
   convictions are affirmed. Statement resulting from request of Jaramillo 
   to assist with translations of booking of other defendants was not result of 
   coercion and was properly admitted. Admission of Castillo's out-of-court 
   statement implicating Gonzalez-Rodriguez was not an abuse of discretion 
   as it was a prior consistent statement. Brady claim by Gonzalez- 
   Rodriguez was not preserved and was not plain error. Evidence was 
   clearly sufficient to support knowledge of an knowing participation in 
   drug transaction for Palacio and Alcantora. Alcantora's claim of 
   prosecutorial misconduct relating to allegation of missing money was not 
   prejudicial or plain error. District court did not abuse its discretion in 
   evidentiary rulings. Regarding challenges to sentences, district court did 
   not clearly err in denying acceptance of responsibility to Londondio after 
   he misrepresented his prior criminal record to probation officer. Denial 
   of mitigating role to Londondio and Palacio was not error. Palacio's 
   sentence under mandatory guidelines was harmless error and not 
   unreasonable.