What is the test for establishing that Pinder knowingly participated in a conspiracy to distribute cocaine?

Pinder argues that evidence was insufficient to establish that he knowingly participated in the conspiracy to distribute cocaine. "In assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, our inquiry is whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." United States v. Meyers, 847 F.2d 1408, 1412 (9th Cir.1988). "The essential elements of a conspiracy are (1) an agreement to engage in criminal activity, (2) one or more overt acts taken to implement the agreement, and (3) the requisite intent to commit the substantive crime. (citations omitted). Once the existence of the conspiracy is shown, evidence establishing beyond a reasonable doubt a knowing connection of the defendant with the conspiracy, even though the connection is slight, is sufficient to convict him of knowing participation in the conspiracy. (citations omitted). However, the connection to the conspiracy must be shown to be 'knowledgeable'; that is, 'the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew of his connection to the charged conspiracy.' " Id. (emphasis in original).