United States v. Stewart-Carrasquillo, 997 F.3d 408

Background

Early morning interdiction off Ceiba, Puerto Rico: FURA agents observed a fast, turbocharged "fishing" boat and saw two individuals throw black-wrapped bales overboard; officers boarded and arrested the three aboard.
Seized contraband: 25 bales (499 bricks; ~502 kg of cocaine; average purity ~78%), with a street value of roughly $10–$12.5 million.
Defendants James Stewart-Carrasquillo and Harold Esquilin-Montañez were passengers/crew on the vessel; they claimed they were invitees on a lobster-fishing trip and that the captain (Juan Carrasquillo) alone loaded the bales.
Trial evidence: government presented agents and lab analysis; defense presented testimony attempting to show a legitimate fishing trip (including a lost/missing fish-finder GPS allegedly corroborating trap placement).
District court convicted both defendants on three counts (possession with intent to distribute aboard a vessel, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting possession of 5+ kg), sentenced to 121 months, and denied Rule 29 motions and admission of a defense "reenactment" video.
On appeal defendants argued (1) insufficient evidence; (2) erroneous exclusion of a homemade demonstrative reenactment video; and (3) prosecutorial misconduct in closing (misstating a defense witness had a "broken" rather than "twisted" ankle).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to support convictions for possession with intent to distribute, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting	Government: abundant direct and circumstantial evidence — large quantity of cocaine, small high-powered boat, absence of fishing indicia, agents observed bales thrown, and defendants' conduct showed readiness to assist	Defendants: they were innocent fishing invitees; captain alone loaded bales; they refused to help and only one or two bales were jettisoned by panic	Affirmed. Viewing evidence in government’s favor, a rational jury could infer illegal enterprise and that defendants were willing participants; convictions stand.
Exclusion of defense’s videotaped reenactment	Government: video lacked substantial similarity (different boat, docked vs. open sea, different sea conditions, boat was captained during reenactment) and was confusing/prejudicial	Defendants: video showed feasibility that Carrasquillo alone could have loaded all bales and thus was highly probative	Affirmed. District court did not abuse discretion under Rule 403 — reenactment insufficiently similar and risked misleading jury.
Prosecutorial remark that defense witness had a "broken ankle" (vs. "twisted ankle") in closing argument	Government: misstatement was minor, isolated, and harmless; court’s jury instruction cured any confusion	Defendants: misstatement impeached defense story that witness could not join fishing trip and affected credibility	Affirmed. Remark was fleeting and isolated; trial judge’s instructions sufficed and any residual prejudice was unlikely to affect outcome.

Key Cases Cited

United States v. Paz-Álvarez, 799 F.3d 12 (1st Cir. 2015) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence; view evidence in light most favorable to the verdict)
United States v. Appolon, 715 F.3d 362 (1st Cir. 2013) (direct and circumstantial evidence afforded equal weight in sufficiency review)
United States v. Guerrero, 114 F.3d 332 (1st Cir. 1997) (two-step inference: vessel engaged in illegal activity and defendant ready to assist)
Fusco v. Gen. Motors Corp., 11 F.3d 259 (1st Cir. 1993) (substantial similarity test for demonstrative reenactments and district court’s gatekeeping discretion)
United States v. Joyner, 191 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 1999) (three-prong test for prosecutorial misconduct: isolation/deliberateness, curative instruction, likelihood of prejudice)
United States v. Leoner-Aguirre, 939 F.3d 310 (1st Cir. 2019) (deference to district court’s Rule 403 balancing)
United States v. Jackson, 479 F.3d 485 (7th Cir. 2007) (applying substantial similarity requirement to reenactments in criminal trials)