United States v. Bennett
This text of United States v. Bennett (United States v. Bennett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS May 23, 2003 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
No. 02-11389 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CYNTHIA YVONNE BENNETT,
Defendant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:02-CR-104-1-A --------------------
Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Cynthia Yvonne Bennett appeals her conviction and sentence
for possession with intent to distribute approximately 2,696.7
grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(B). Bennett argues that the evidence was insufficient to
show that she knowingly and intentionally possessed the drugs.
She also argues that the district court erred in increasing her
offense level by two levels pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 02-11389 -2-
Because Bennett did not move for judgment of acquittal at
the close of the evidence, we review her challenge to the
sufficiency of the evidence for a manifest miscarriage of justice
and find none. See United States v. Johnson, 87 F.3d 133, 136
(5th Cir. 1996). The evidence supports Bennett’s conviction.
See United States v. Ramos-Garcia, 184 F.3d 463, 466 (5th Cir.
1999); United States v. Pineda-Ortuno, 952 F.2d 98, 102 (5th Cir.
1992).
The district court did not clearly err in determining that
Bennett had committed perjury at trial, thus warranting the
adjustment for obstruction of justice. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1;
United States v. Storm, 36 F.3d 1289, 1295 (5th Cir. 1994). This
determination did not impinge on Bennett’s right to defend
herself. See United States v. Laury, 985 F.2d 1293, 1309 n.21
(5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Bennett, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bennett-ca5-2003.