IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 96-11367
________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
-vs-
CHARITY JEANETT NORTON and HARUNA WALE ADEPEGBA,
a/k/a WALLY ADE,
Defendants-Appellants.
____________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas
(4:96-CR-041)
____________________________________________
July 9, 1997
Before WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges, and LITTLE, District
Judge.*
LITTLE, District Judge:**
In this direct criminal appeal, Defendants-Appellants
Charity Jeanett Norton and Haruna Wale Adepegba, also known as
Wally Ade, seek reversal of their jury trial convictions and
their sentences. Norton asserts that her convictions under 18
*
Chief District Judge of the Western District of Louisiana, sitting by
designation.
**
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
U.S.C. § 1001 and 18 U.S.C. § 1542 violate double jeopardy,
that the district court applied the incorrect sentencing
guideline, and that the court erred in refusing to make a
downward adjustment for lack of profit motive. Adepegba
argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his
conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and that the lower court
erred in increasing his sentence for obstruction of justice.
We have carefully considered the record on appeal and the
facts and legal arguments advanced by able counsel in their
respective briefs to this court. Our review convinces us that
the convictions do not subject Norton to double jeopardy, that
the evidence is more than sufficient to support Adepegba's
conviction, and that the sentences imposed are lawful.
We pause to add an additional comment in regard to
Norton's plea for an adjustment to her sentence for lack of
profit motive. The burden of establishing a lack of profit
motive rests squarely with the defendant. United States v.
Cuellar-Flores, 891 F.2d 92, 93 (5th Cir. 1989). Because
Norton relied only upon her own testimony at trial, which the
court was entitled not to credit, the court did not err in
refusing the adjustment.
Consequently, the convictions of Defendants-Appellants
and the sentences imposed as a result of those convictions are
AFFIRMED.
2