IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50469
(Summary Calendar)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOHNNY MARION MCCOY,
Defendant-Appellant.
.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(W-95-CR-107)
July 7, 1997
Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Johnny Marion McCoy appeals his convictions for interstate transportation of a stolen motor
vehicle (18 U.S.C. § 2312) and interstate transportation of stolen property valued at $5,000 or more
(18 U.S.C. § 2314), alleging that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. McCoy also
argues that a material variance existed between the indictment and the evidence presented at trial.
This argument also amounts to a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. After a careful review
*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published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.
of the record, briefs and authorities, we find that the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to
find McCoy guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. United states v. Parziale, 947 F.2d 123, 127-28 (5th
Cir. 1991) (considering defendant’s sufficiency of the evidence argument based on his conviction
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2314).
The jury was entitled to infer based on the totality of the evidence adduced that McCoy had
the requisite criminal intent to steal the truck and its contents, either when he left Texas or shortly
thereafter. See United States v. Merkt, 764 F.2d 266, 272 (5th Cir. 1985). In addition, McCoy has
failed to present evidence showing that, if there was a variance between the indictment and the
evidence presented at trial, his substantial rights were prejudiced. United States v. Massey, 827 F.2d
995, 1003 (5th Cir. 1987). Thus, McCoy’s appeal fails on both grounds. Accordingly, McCoy’s
convictions are AFFIRMED.
2