United States v. Adkins

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 99-4463 MARGARET M. ADKINS, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (CR-98-194) Submitted: January 6, 2000 Decided: February 4, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Wayne D. Inge, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Karen L. Bleattler, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). _________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Margaret M. Adkins appeals her conviction for being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (1994). On appeal, Adkins contends that the evidence adduced at trial was not sufficient to support her conviction and that the district court violated Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) by allowing certain testimony regarding her actions and demeanor on the evening of her offense. We have reviewed the evidence of record and find that it amply supports Adkins' conviction. See United States v. Hoyte , 51 F.3d 1239, 1245 (4th Cir. 1995); United States v. Brewer, 1 F.3d 1430, 1437 (4th Cir. 1993). Adkins' contentions amount to little more than an invitation to this court to revisit the credibility of the Government's witnesses, a course of action we routinely decline. See United States v. Murphy, 35 F.3d 143, 148 (4th Cir. 1994). Neither can we discern any error stemming from the district court's failure to exclude testimony describing Adkins' actions and appearance on the evening in ques- tion. United States v. Powers, 59 F.3d 1460, 1464-65 (4th Cir. 1995). Finding no merit to either of Adkins' contentions on appeal, we affirm the conviction and sentence. 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 2