*Pursuant to 5

TH 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 98-20298

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

WARREN DEAN CORNETT,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-95-0265-2

March 31, 1999

Before WISDOM, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

A jury convicted Warren Dean Cornett of conspiracy to possess with the intent to

distibute cocaine and cocaine base, and of two counts of aiding and abetting the possession with

the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base. The district court sentenced Cornett to three

concurrent life sentences, 10 years of supervised release, and ordered him to pay a $1000 fine. 

Cornett now appeals, contending that the evidence was not sufficient to support his convictions. 

We affirm.

Because he failed to move for a judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence, we
 

2

See United States v. Johnson, 87 F.3d 133, 136 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 1482 (1997).

 

3

Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

 

4

Id.

 

5 United States v. Robles-Pantoja, 887 F.2d 1250, 1254 (5th Cir. 1989).

 

6

Johnson, 87 F.3d at 136 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

 

7 United States v. Bermea, 30 F.3d 1539, 1552 (5th Cir. 1994).

review Cornett’s challenge for a “manifest miscarriage of justice”.2 “A manifest miscarriage of

justice is present if the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt.”3 We “consider the

evidence, and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from that evidence, in the light most

favorable to the government.”4

Cornett first argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conspiracy conviction. 

“The jury may infer a conspiracy agreement from circumstantial evidence, and may rely upon

presence and association, along with other evidence, in finding that a conspiracy existed.”5 Our

review of the record leads us to the conclusion that there was evidence presented by the

government that supported Cornett’s involvement in the drug conspiracy. Considering the

evidence in the light most favorable to the government, it cannot be said that “the record is devoid

of evidence pointing to guilt.”6 Cornett’s argument is therefore without merit.

Cornett also contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the aiding and abetting

convictions because these convictions were based on the uncorroborated testimony of an

unindicted coconspirator who testified for the purpose of getting his own sentence reduced. “[A]

guilty verdict may be sustained if supported only by the uncorroborated testimony of a

coconspirator, even if the witness is interested due to a plea bargain or promise of leniency, unless

the testimony is incredible or insubstantial on its face.”7 Because Cornett does not contend that

the coconspirator’s testimony is incredible or insubstantial, his contention lacks merit.

Finally, Cornett contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction on

one of the aiding and abetting counts because the government did not prove that he personally

possessed the cocaine involved. In his brief, Cornett makes no argument and cites to no authority
 

8 United States v. Gonzales, 121 F.3d 928, 936 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 726, 1084

(1998).

 

9

See Johnson, 87 F.3d at 136.

in support of this contention. Because “[a] defendant may be convicted of aiding and abetting the

offense of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance even if he did not have actual

or constructive possession of the substance”8, Cornett’s argument on this point is without merit. 

For the foregoing reasons, Cornett has failed to establish a “manifest miscarriage of

justice”.9 Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.