United States v. Baltazar-Uribe ( 2003 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
April 15, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-50799
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CHRISTIAN BALTAZAR-URIBE,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(EP-01-CR-1838-1-DB)
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Christian Baltazar-Uribe was indicted on six charges of
conspiracy to import marijuana. After hearing testimony of his co-
conspirators, a jury found him guilty on all counts. Baltazar was
sentenced to 121-months incarceration.
Baltazar contends: (1) the evidence is insufficient because
the government witnesses were untrustworthy; and (2) the district
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
court erred in denying his motion for mistrial when the prosecutor
misstated a fact in closing argument.
Baltazar's sufficiency claim is based only on government
witnesses lacking credibility. Of course, the jury is the final
arbiter both of the weight of the evidence and of the credibility
of witnesses. United States v. Restrepo, 994 F.2d 173, 182 (5th
Cir. 1993). The testimony of a co-conspirator alone may be
sufficient to support a verdict. Id. Baltazar has not shown the
evidence insufficient.
Concerning Baltazar's claim that his motion for a mistrial
should have been granted after the prosecutor made a misstatement
of fact during closing argument, the district court did not abuse
its discretion. The jury was immediately directed to disregard the
erroneous comment and the prosecutor corrected his remark. E.g.,
United States v. Crane, 445 F.2d 509, 520 (5th Cir. 1971).
AFFIRMED
2