What is the test for determining whether a defendant has been convicted of involvement in a racketeering conspiracy?

Her chief contention on appeal is that the United States did not present sufficient evidence to show she had the intent necessary to participate in a racketeering conspiracy. "Once a conspiracy exists, evidence establishing beyond a reasonable doubt defendant's connection with the conspiracy, even though the connection is slight, is sufficient to convict defendant of knowing participation in the conspiracy." United States v. Bautista-Avila, 6 F.3d 1360, 1362 (9th Cir.1993) (citations and quotation marks omitted). To prove this connection, "[e]vidence has to be produced to show that [the defendant] had knowledge of the conspiracy and acted in furtherance of it. Mere casual association with conspiring people is not enough." United States v. Cloughessy, 572 F.2d 190, 191 (9th Cir.1977) (citations omitted).