Acosta, Victor Manuel
2014 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 687
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2014Background
- Appellant Acosta was convicted of money laundering after about $502,020 in cash was found in a secret cavity behind the speaker box of his Freightliner truck.
- The cash was vacuum-sealed and hidden, allegedly to avoid detection by drug dogs.
- A narcotics-dog alert (Woods) identified the two vacuum-sealed cash bags.
- Index evidence included the truck’s origin/destination pattern, logbook route El Paso–Chicago, and multiple cell phones.
- Appellant claimed he was a “blind mule” with no knowledge of the cash; Dominguez was convicted beforehand.
- The court of appeals held the dog alert and circumstantial evidence sufficient to link the money to drug trafficking, and Acosta sought review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is a drug-dog alert alone sufficient to prove proceeds nexus? | Acosta argues dog alert alone is insufficient. | State contends dog alert is probative within totality of evidence. | Dog alert admissible as circumstantial evidence within totality. |
| Do the amount, packaging, storage, and related circumstances establish nexus to drug proceeds? | Acosta asserts insufficient nexus from circumstantial facts. | State relies on totality of circumstances (amount, vacuum-sealing, secret compartment, route). | Yes; the totality supports that cash was proceeds of drug delivery. |
| Is the totality-of-evidence standard properly applied to connect cash to illegal drugs? | Acosta challenges reliance on aggregated facts. | State argues cumulative force and common-sense inferences support nexus. | Court properly applied totality-of-evidence standard to affirm nexus. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court 1979) (reliability of evidence under the reasonable-doubt standard)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (single-sufficiency standard for evidence)
- Winfrey v. State, 323 S.W.3d 875 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (drug-dog scent-lineup reliability concerns)
- State v. $11,014.00, 820 S.W.2d 783 (Tex. 1991) (nexus evidence from cash packaging and concealment)
- Acosta v. State, No. 11-11-00226-CR, 2013 WL 4052633 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2013) (ciphered as context in likelihood of drug-proceeds nexus)