Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patsy Partin SALMON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-10-15
Citations: 20 F. App'x 225
Docket Number: No. 01-4087
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patsy Partin SALMON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 20
Pages: 225–226

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patsy Partin SALMON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-4087.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 25, 2001.
Decided Oct. 15, 2001.
Robert H. Hale, Jr., Raleigh, NC, for appellant. John Stuart Bruce, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Scott L. Wilkinson, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for appellee.
Before NIEMEYER and DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Patsy Partin Salmon appeals her conviction for bankruptcy fraud and the aiding and abetting of bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2, 152(7) (West 2000). Salmon contends that the district court erred in denying her motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 29, to set aside the verdict and for judgment of acquittal, in which she argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. We affirm.
To determine whether there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction, this court considers whether, taking the evi dence in the light most favorable to the government, any reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942); United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir.1996). We grant Salmon's motion to file a supplemental joint appendix. We have reviewed the record and the briefs and find that there was sufficient evidence to support Salmon's conviction for bankruptcy fraud and the aiding and abetting of bankruptcy fraud. Accordingly, we affirm Salmon's conviction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.