Court Opinion 4-1 United States V. Yoshida, 303 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2002)

Section 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it a crime to (1) encourage or induce, (2) an alien to come to the United States, (3) while knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry or residence is or will be in violation of law. 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv). We have held that " 'to convict a person of violating section 1324(a)(1)(A), the government must show that the defendant acted with criminal intent', i.e., the intent to violate United States immigration laws." United States v. Barajas-Montiel, 185 F.3d 947, 951 (9th Cir. 1999) (quoting United States v. Nguyen, 73 F.3d 887, 893 (9th Cir. 1995)).

Questions

What circumstantial evidence did the prosecution offer to prove that the defendant was knowingly escorting aliens into the United States?

What does this case tell you about the ability to secure a criminal conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence? Do you believe after reading this case that direct evidence is more likely to result in a conviction than circumstantial evidence?