IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 97-41175
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KENNY BOBBITT,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 9:96-CR-31-2
June 26, 1998
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and DEMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kenny Bobbitt appeals his conviction for aiding and abetting
in removing a vehicle identification number in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 2 & 511. He argues that the evidence was insufficient
to support his conviction.
Our review of the record and the arguments and authorities
convinces us that no reversible error was committed. Because
*
Pursuant to Local 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
Bobbitt failed to move for a judgment of acquittal at any point
in the proceedings, this court’s review is limited to determining
whether there was any manifest miscarriage of justice. See U.S.
v. Johnson, 87 F.3d 133, 136 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117
S.Ct. 1482 (1997). “A manifest miscarriage of justice is present
if the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt.” Id.
(citations omitted). As with any jury verdict, this court
reviews the evidence and all reasonable inferences that may be
drawn from that evidence in the light most favorable to the
government. Id.
Here, Bobbitt admitted dismantling a stolen 1993 Peterbilt
truck traced to the property of Bobbitt’s co-defendant, Charles
Craven, over the course of two days. Regardless of whether he
actually removed the vehicle identification numbers himself, he
actively participated with Craven in dismantling and stripping
the stolen vehicle so that parts could be reused without
detection. “This court must affirm a conviction for aiding and
abetting when sufficient evidence is tendered that the defendant
affirmatively acted with the intent to make the transaction
succeed.” U.S. v. Jaramillo, 42 F.3d 920, 924 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied, 514 U.S. 1134 (1995). We find that the evidence on
record pointing to guilt is not so deficient as to constitute a
manifest miscarriage of justice. See Johnson, 87 F.3d at 136.
Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
2