United States v. Nwoko ( 2022 )

Case: 21-20558 Document: 00516363768 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 21-20558 June 21, 2022
Summary Calendar
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Akalakachinyem Nwoko,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:16-CR-258-3
Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
A jury convicted Defendant-Appellant Akalakachinyem Nwoko of
one count of conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud and three counts of
aiding and abetting healthcare fraud. The district court sentenced her to 45
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-20558 Document: 00516363768 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2022
No. 21-20558
months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and payment of
restitution.
Nwoko contends on appeal that the district court abused its discretion
in permitting the Government to present video evidence at trial in violation
of Federal Rule of Evidence 403. She explains that the evidence was of scant
probative value because it depicted events which occurred after the time
period alleged in the indictment and does not show her engaging in criminal
conduct. Nwoko also contends that the video evidence was cumulative of
other evidence and did nothing but confuse the issues and mislead the jury.
Because Nwoko’s contentions fail under both the clear abuse of discretion
and plain error standards of review, we need not determine which standard
applies. See United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519, 525 (5th Cir. 2008); see
also United States v. Dillon, 532 F.3d 379, 387 (5th Cir. 2008) (setting forth
the standard of review for a properly preserved objection to a district court’s
evidentiary ruling).
The video evidence served the probative value of providing context
regarding the operation of the conspiracy and Nwoko’s role in that
conspiracy. See United States v. El-Mezain, 664 F.3d 467, 508 (5th Cir. 2011).
Nwoko fails to explain how the video, or any inference drawn from it was
misleading, confused the issues, or was otherwise improper. More
importantly, she fails to explain how any potential danger of misleading the
jury or confusing the issues substantially outweighed the probative value of
the evidence to warrant exclusion, and the record does not support such a
conclusion. See id.AFFIRMED.
2