UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-4544
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HUA FANG, a/k/a Hana Fang Tjossem, a/k/a Hwa Bang Fang,
a/k/a Bang Hwa Fang,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (1:12-cr-00529-GBL-1)
Submitted: May 19, 2014 Decided: May 23, 2014
Before SHEDD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John C. Gardner, GARDNER & MENDOZA, P.C., Virginia Beach,
Virginia, for Appellant. Ryan K. Dickey, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Hua Fang appeals the district court’s judgment after
the jury convicted her of attempted unlawful naturalization in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1425(a) (2012) and false statement in a
naturalization matter in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1015(a)
(2012). Fang’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting, in his opinion,
there are no meritorious grounds for appeal but raising the
issue of whether there was sufficient evidence to convict Fang
of the indicted charges. Fang was notified of her right to file
a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. We affirm.
A defendant challenging the sufficiency of the
evidence faces a heavy burden. United States v. Cone, 714 F.3d
197, 212 (4th Cir. 2013) (citation and quotations omitted). We
do not review the credibility of the witnesses and assume that
the jury resolved all contradictions in the testimony in favor
of the Government. Id. We must uphold a jury verdict if there
is substantial evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to
the Government, to support it. United States v. Al Sabahi, 719
F.3d 305, 311 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 464 (2013)
(citation and quotations omitted). Substantial evidence is
“evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as
adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant’s
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Burgos, 94
2
F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc). We have reviewed the
record and conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support
Fang’s convictions.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. This
court requires that counsel inform his or her client, in
writing, of his or her right to petition the Supreme Court of
the United States for further review. If the client requests
that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a
petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court
for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion
must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3