### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH 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 acquit tal under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29, we will affirm the conviction if after view i n g the evidence, the reasonable inferenc e s therefrom, and all credibility determinations in favor of U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Sep tem ber 2 8, 2 012 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 12-60083 Document: 00512003166 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/28/2012No. 12-60083

the verdict, we conclude th a t a rational jury could have found that the Government proved the necessary elements of the crime. Uni t e d 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 evi d e n c e o r the credibility of witnesses. United States v. Garcia , 995 F.2d 556, 561 (5th Cir. 199 3). The Government adduced te s timony 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 b u t c o u ld not because Page’s nursing license had been restricted by the Mississippi Board of Nursing (MBN). Cooper testified that Page told her the restri c ti o n s h ad been rescinded by a judge and that she would fax Cooper the verification. Shortly thereafter, Coop e r received by fax what was purported to be a federal district court order showing the dismissal of an ac ti o n b e tween 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 th e verdict, provides ample grounds for a finding of guilty knowle d g e b e cause 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 c reated 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 c a s e n u mber 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: 09/28/2012No. 12-60083

convenient and familiar to Page, tho u gh s he 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 li n k between Page and the bogus order. P a ge p oint s to all eged shortcomings in the Government’s inve s ti gatio n an d 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 th e o f fense beyond a reasonable doubt.” Moreno , 185 F.3d at 471. Page asks this court to accept her testimony a s t ru e 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