United States v. Newell

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: March 25, 2004
• Docket: 95-30829
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

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.

* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. 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