United States v. Martinez-Zambrano , 36 F. App'x 120 ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                          UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,              
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.                             No. 01-4885
    JOSE REMIJIO MARTINEZ-ZAMBRANO,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
    Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge.
    (CR-00-3-V)
    Submitted: May 7, 2002
    Decided: June 4, 2002
    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    COUNSEL
    Jeffrey B. Welty, POYNER & SPRUILL, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Car-
    olina; E. Fitzgerald Parnell, III, POYNER & SPRUILL, L.L.P., Char-
    lotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina,
    for Appellee.
    2               UNITED STATES v. MARTINEZ-ZAMBRANO
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Jose Remijio Martinez-Zambrano appeals his jury convictions for
    one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine
    and marijuana and seven counts of possession with intent to distribute
    cocaine and marijuana, in violation of 
    21 U.S.C.A. §§ 841
    , 846 (West
    1999 & Supp. 2001), and concurrent sentences of seventy-eight
    months’ imprisonment on each count. We affirm.
    We find the prosecutor’s comments during her rebuttal closing
    arguments were not plainly erroneous. See United States v. Olano,
    
    507 U.S. 725
    , 732-37 (1993). We conclude the remarks did not
    amount to improper bolstering, vouching, or reference to materials
    outside the record and were neither improper nor prejudicial. See
    United States v. Wilson, 
    135 F.3d 291
    , 297 (4th Cir. 1998); United
    States v. Mitchell, 
    1 F.3d 235
    , 239, 241-42 (4th Cir. 1993).
    Therefore, we affirm Martinez-Zambrano’s convictions and sen-
    tences. 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-4885

Citation Numbers: 36 F. App'x 120

Judges: Luttig, Williams, Gregory

Filed Date: 6/4/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024