United States of America v. Antonio Oneil Christian

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-4354
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ANTONIO ONEIL CHRISTIAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District
Judge. (CR-00-76)
Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: September 26, 2001
Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Theodore J. Korth, NELSON & KORTH, P.L.C., Charlottesville, Vir-
ginia, for Appellant. Ruth E. Plagenhoef, United States Attorney,
Bruce A. Pagel, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Oneil Christian appeals his conviction for possession
with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.A
§ 841(a)(1) (West 1999). Christian asserts that the district court
erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. We affirm.
After a thorough review of the trial transcript, we find that
the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the gov-
ernment, was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to have found
the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. See
United States v. Gallimore, 247 F.3d 134, 136-37 (4th Cir. 2001)
(stating standard of review for denial of motion for judgment of
acquittal based upon sufficiency of evidence and discussing
constructive possession); United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 873
(4th Cir. 1996) (en banc) (discussing elements of offense). We
therefore find that the district court did not err in denying the
motion for judgment of acquittal.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --