UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4376

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

PALMER R. ROBINSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District 

Judge. (8:15-cr-00598-DKC-1)

Submitted: October 12, 2016 Decided: November 4, 2016

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hughie Duvall Hunt, II, KEMET HUNT LAW GROUP, College Park, 

Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States 

Attorney, Mara V.J. Senn, Special Assistant United States 

Attorney, Jane F. Nathan, Assistant United States Attorney, 

Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

In a bench trial before a magistrate judge, Palmer Robinson 

was convicted of driving under the influence and operating a 

vehicle with a blood or breath alcohol content of .08 or more, 

in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 4.23(a)(1), (2) (2016); unsafe 

operation of a motor vehicle and failure to maintain control, in 

violation of 36 C.F.R. § 4.22(b)(1), (3) (2016); and vandalism 

of Government property, in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.31(a)(3) 

(2016). The district court affirmed his convictions. See

United States v. Bursey, 416 F.3d 301, 305 (4th Cir. 2005) 

(providing standard of review). On appeal, Robinson argues that 

the magistrate judge erred in taking judicial notice that the 

U.S. Park Police is authorized to perform law enforcement 

functions on land owned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

and that the Government’s evidence at trial was insufficient to 

support his convictions. We affirm.

“We review evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion.” 

United States v. Faulls, 821 F.3d 502, 508 (4th Cir. 2016). We 

will reverse an evidentiary ruling only when the magistrate 

judge’s determination “was arbitrary or irrational.” Id. Our

review of the record on appeal convinces us that the magistrate 

judge did not abuse his discretion in relying on an officer’s

testimony to take judicial notice that the U.S. Park Police is
3

authorized to perform law enforcement functions on land owned by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. See Fed. R. Evid. 201.

Robinson also argues that the Government failed to present 

sufficient evidence to support his convictions. “We review a 

challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo and 

. . . must sustain a verdict if there is substantial evidence, 

viewed in the light most favorable to the government, to support 

it.” United States v. Bran, 776 F.3d 276, 279 (4th Cir. 2015) 

(citations omitted), cert. denied, 136 S. Ct. 792 (2016). We 

have reviewed the trial testimony and conclude that sufficient 

evidence supports the magistrate judge’s findings of guilt. To 

the extent Robinson challenges the magistrate judge’s 

credibility findings, “we defer to the [fact finder]’s 

determinations of credibility and resolutions of conflicts in 

the evidence, as they are within the sole province of the [fact 

finder] and are not susceptible to judicial review.” United 

States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 303 (4th Cir. 2014) (internal 

quotation marks omitted).

Accordingly, we affirm the criminal judgment. 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