What evidence was sufficient to support a jury's conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine?

Sufficient evidence supported the jury's guilty verdicts. A government witness testified that Carbajal told him "he was a distributor and transporter of the methamphetamine that was being sold in the Martinez, California area." In addition to that testimony, the government connected Carbajal to other members of the conspiracy ¹ and linked Carbajal to the 1.7 kilograms of methamphetamine seized from the truck Carbajal was driving. ² Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt the requisite conspiratorial knowledge and intent. See, e.g., United States v. Torres-Rodriguez, 930 F.2d 1375, 1382 (9th Cir.1991) (holding that evidence that defendant "worked on truck in the garage at [a co-defendant's] residence just before the truck was stopped and found to have a false gas tank that contained drugs," drove the truck carrying the drugs, and had contact with other members of the conspiracy in the past was sufficient to support conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute convictions). ³