United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 14, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-41710
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
MARCUS WASHINGTON
Defendant - Appellant
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 9:02-CR-32-1
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge and JOLLY and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Marcus Washington appeals from his jury-verdict conviction
for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute 50 grams or more of crack cocaine. He first argues
that his sentence is invalid pursuant to Blakely v. Washington,
124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). In United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d
464, 465-66 (5th Cir. 2004), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. July
14, 2004) (No. 04-5263), this court held that “Blakely does not
extend to the federal Guidelines.” Washington acknowledges that
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 03-41710
-2-
his instant argument is foreclosed by Pineiro but urges that we
reconsider Pineiro’s holding. A panel of this court cannot
overrule a prior panel’s decision in the absence of an
intervening contrary or superseding decision by this court
sitting en banc or by the United States Supreme Court. United
States v. Lipscomb, 299 F.3d 303, 313 n.34 (5th Cir. 2002).
Washington’s Blakely argument does not warrant relief.
Washington also contends that the evidence produced at trial
was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict. Because
Washington has not shown that the coconspirator testimony
produced at trial was incredible as a matter of law, his
challenges on grounds of credibility and lack of corroboration
fail. See United States v. Gadison, 8 F.3d 186, 190 (5th Cir.
1993); United States v. Greenwood, 974 F.2d 1449, 1457 (5th Cir.
1992). Moreover, examination of the record shows that a rational
trier of fact could have found that the evidence established
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443
U.S. 307, 318 (1979).
Accordingly, the district court’s judgment of conviction is
AFFIRMED.