United States v. Newell

* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-30829
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL A. NEWELL,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. CR-95-50027-01
- - - - - - - - - -
June 21, 1996
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael A. Newell appeals his conviction for passing
counterfeit United States currency. He claims that there was
insufficient evidence to support his conviction, that the district
court erred in allowing a government agent to testify as a lay
witness under FED. R. EVID. 701, and that the district court
impermissibly commented on the evidence.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the
evidence was sufficient. See United States v. Acosta, 972 F.2d 86,
89 (5th Cir. 1992). And, the admission of the agent's Rule 701
testimony was not an abuse of discretion. See, e.g., United States
v. Dotson, 799 F.2d 189, 194 (5th Cir. 1986). Finally, as for the
district court's comments on the agent's testimony, no objection
was made on that basis; the comments did not amount to plain error.
See, e.g., United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th
Cir. 1994) (en banc), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 115 S. Ct. 1266
(1995).
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --