United States v. Alejandro Williams

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: May 31, 2023
• Docket: 22-4455
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-4455 Doc: 35 Filed: 05/31/2023 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-4455

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ALEJANDRO GARLYNN WILLIAMS,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:20−cr−00547−FL-2)

Submitted: April 26, 2023 Decided: May 31, 2023

Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Robert L. Cooper, COOPER, DAVIS & COOPER, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Michael F. Easley, Jr., United States Attorney, David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, Jimmie I. Bellamy, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-4455 Doc: 35 Filed: 05/31/2023 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM: A jury convicted Alejandro Williams on one count of conspiracy to use

unauthorized access devices, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(b)(2), ten counts of use of

unauthorized access devices and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2)

and ten counts of aggravated identity theft and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 1028A(a)(1). The district court denied Williams’ Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 motion for judgment

of acquittal. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his

convictions. Finding no error, we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal.

United States v. Green, 599 F.3d 360, 367 (4th Cir. 2010), cert. denied, 562 U.S. 913. In

assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, we “construe the evidence in the light most

favorable to the government, assuming its credibility, and drawing all favorable inferences

from it, and will sustain the jury verdict if any rational trier of fact could have found the

essential elements of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v.

Penniegraft, 641 F.3d 566, 571 (4th Cir. 2011) (citation and emphasis omitted). “Appellate

reversal on grounds of insufficient evidence . . . will be confined to cases where the

prosecution’s failure is clear.” Green, 599 F.3d at 367 (internal quotation marks, alteration,

and citation omitted). “A defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support

his conviction bears a heavy burden.” United States v. Beidler, 110 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th

Cir. 1997) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

We have reviewed the record of the proceedings below in light of Williams’

arguments on appeal and conclude that sufficient evidence clearly supports the jury’s

2 USCA4 Appeal: 22-4455 Doc: 35 Filed: 05/31/2023 Pg: 3 of 3

verdict. Accordingly, we affirm his convictions and sentence. 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