United States v. Bennett ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                          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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.