IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-60083

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

HELEN PAGE,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:10-CR-65-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Helen Page appeals her conviction by a jury for using the forged signature

of a federal bankruptcy judge to authenticate a bogus court order in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 505. She contends that the evidence was insufficient to prove that

she concurred in the forgery or knew about it or its transmittal. 

Because Page moved for acquittal under Federal Rule of Criminal

Procedure 29, we will affirm the conviction if after viewing the evidence, the

reasonable inferences therefrom, and all credibility determinations in favor of

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 28, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 12-60083 Document: 00512003166 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/28/2012
No. 12-60083

the verdict, we conclude that a rational jury could have found that the

Government proved the necessary elements of the crime. United States v.

Moreno, 185 F.3d 465, 471 (5th Cir. 1999). “[T]he jury is free to choose among

reasonable constructions of the evidence” and to reject all, some, or none of the

defense’s testimony. Id.; see United States v. Estrada-Fernandez, 150 F.3d 491,

496 n.3 (5th Cir. 1998). We will not reweigh the evidence or the credibility of

witnesses. United States v. Garcia, 995 F.2d 556, 561 (5th Cir. 1993). 

The Government adduced testimony from Shelia Cooper, director of

nursing at the Care Clinic of Clinton (CCC), who testified that Page was seeking

employment with the CCC and that Cooper wanted to hire Page but could not

because Page’s nursing license had been restricted by the Mississippi Board of

Nursing (MBN). Cooper testified that Page told her the restrictions had been

rescinded by a judge and that she would fax Cooper the verification. Shortly

thereafter, Cooper received by fax what was purported to be a federal district

court order showing the dismissal of an action between Page and the MBN

concerning restrictions on Page’s nursing license. The order was supposedly

signed by “Judge Edward Ellington” and by Page’s attorney, “Angela Gray.” The

fax cover sheet said that Page had sent it. It is not disputed that the order was

bogus and that the signature of Judge Ellington, a United States Bankruptcy

Court Judge, was forged. 

The foregoing evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the

verdict, provides ample grounds for a finding of guilty knowledge because it

indicates that Page had a reason to create and send the bogus order and that she

expressed an intent to do so. The jury was not required to believe Page’s denial

or her speculation that someone else created and sent the bogus order. See

Estrada-Fernandez, 150 F.3d at 496 n.3. 

In addition, the Government presented evidence that the case number on

the bogus order was the same case number as Page’s prior, unrelated

bankruptcy case over which the judge had presided. This information was thus

2

Case: 12-60083 Document: 00512003166 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/28/2012
No. 12-60083

convenient and familiar to Page, though she argued that it was available to

others as well. The Government also adduced evidence showing that there was

no record of a lawyer named Angela Gray, who was named as Page’s lawyer on

the bogus order, but that Page knew a lawyer named Angela Gray Marshall, to

whom Page had leased office space. This provides another link between Page

and the bogus order. 

Page points to alleged shortcomings in the Government’s investigation and

to the lack of certain forensic evidence. That the Government might have made

a stronger case is irrelevant as long as “a rational trier of fact could have found

that the government proved the essential elements of the offense beyond a

reasonable doubt.” Moreno, 185 F.3d at 471. Page asks this court to accept her

testimony as true and to view the evidence in a light favorable to her. This is

precisely contrary to the correct standard of review. See id. The judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED. 

3

Case: 12-60083 Document: 00512003166 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/28/2012