UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 98-30297
Summary Calendar
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FREDRICK D. LAWSON, JR.
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 97-CR-10016-1
February 15, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, and BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Fredrick D. Lawson, Jr., appeals his conviction for
distribution of cocaine base. The sale in issue was to an
undercover officer, who testified at trial, as did Lawson.
Lawson contends that his counsel was ineffective for failing
to move for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence
(he had so moved at the close of the Government’s case, prior to
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
Lawson testifying); and that the evidence was insufficient for
finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
After reviewing the record and arguments on appeal, we
conclude that Lawson was not prejudiced by counsel’s not then
seeking judgment of acquittal because, even had counsel done so,
the motion would have been denied. Restated, the evidence was
sufficient for conviction. See United States v. Rosalez-Orozco, 8
F.3d 198, 199 (5th Cir. 1993).
On the merits of the sufficiency claim, and because the motion
for judgment of acquittal was not made at the close of the
evidence, we review under a far more restricted standard. Lawson
must demonstrate plain error or a manifest miscarriage of justice
based upon insufficiency of the evidence. See United States v.
Pierre, 958 F.2d 1304, 1310 (5th Cir. 1992)(en banc); United States
v. Vaquero, 997 F.2d 78, 82 (5th Cir. 1993). As reflected above,
he fails to do so.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -