United States v. Jansen Yeboah , 535 F. App'x 297 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4948
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JANSEN YEBOAH, a/k/a Koby, a/k/a Coby, a/k/a Kobby,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (4:11-cr-00031-JLK-1)
Submitted: June 14, 2013 Decided: July 25, 2013
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Elmer R. Woodard, III, ELMER WOODARD ATTORNEY AT LAW, PC,
Blairs, Virginia, for Appellant. Timothy J. Heaphy, United
States Attorney, Ashley B. Neese, Assistant United States
Attorney, Elizabeth G. Wright, Assistant United States Attorney,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
A federal grand jury indicted Jansen Yeboah for his
membership and participation in an alleged credit card fraud
conspiracy that operated in the Western District of Virginia
during June and July 2011. The grand jury generally charged that
members of the alleged conspiracy, including Yeboah, obtained
stolen credit card numbers from numerous victims, re-encoded the
stolen credit card numbers onto depleted gift cards and other
cards that have magnetic strips, and used the cards bearing
stolen numbers to purchase various items. The grand jury
specifically charged Yeboah with one count of conspiring with
others to commit access device fraud (18 U.S.C. § 371), six
substantive counts of access device fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1029),
and six substantive counts of aggravated identity theft (18
U.S.C. § 1028A). At the conclusion of a four-day trial, the
petit jury convicted Yeboah on all counts, and the district
court sentenced him to a 124-month imprisonment term. Yeboah now
argues on appeal that the evidence is insufficient to sustain
the convictions. We affirm.
A defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence
faces a heavy burden, and we will reverse a conviction on
insufficiency grounds only in those rare cases of clear failure
by the prosecution. United States v. Cone, 714 F.3d 197, 212
(4th Cir. 2013). In considering such a claim, we view the
2
evidence in the light mofavorable to the government to determine
whether any rational trier of fact could find the essential
elements of the charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and we
accord the government all reasonable inferences from the facts
shown to those sought to be established. Id. Moreover, we do not
review the credibility of the witnesses, and we assume that the
jury resolved all contradictions in the testimony in the
government’s favor. Id.
In challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting
his convictions, Yeboah argues that the government failed to
prove that he knew or should have known that he was using
fraudulent cards. Applying the foregoing standard of review, we
find no merit to this argument. Stated succinctly, the
government presented ample direct and circumstantial evidence
for the jury reasonably to conclude (among other things) that
the conspiracy involved at least nine people, including Yeboah,
who went to Danville, Virginia, for the purpose of committing
credit/debit card fraud; Yeboah knew that cards were being re-
encoded and that they had stolen numbers on them; and Yeboah
either used, or aided and abetted the use of, stolen
credit/debit card numbers for each occasion charged in the
substantive counts. Therefore, the evidence is unquestionably
sufficient to support the verdicts.
3
Based on the foregoing, we affirm Yeboah’s convictions. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
4