Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Lee ALLEN, a/k/a Sean Allen, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-06-04
Citations: 65 F. App'x 486
Docket Number: No. 03-4035
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Lee ALLEN, a/k/a Sean Allen, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 65
Pages: 486–487

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shawn Lee ALLEN, a/k/a Sean Allen, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-4035.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 6, 2003.
Decided June 4, 2003.
David Lassiter, Jr., Jefferson & Lassiter, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Olivia N. Hawkins, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Shawn Lee Allen appeals his conviction and 151-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute more than fifty grams of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000). Allen first challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conspiracy to distribute cocaine base conviction. He argues that no physical evidence such as drugs, photographs, tapes, or fingerprints were presented at trial, and therefore the evidence is insufficient. However, physical evidence is not required to prove involvement in a drug distribution conspiracy. Allen's coconspirators testified to Allen's involvement in drug transactions spanning several years. Furthermore, a drug conspiracy is often proven entirely by such circumstantial evidence. See United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 857 (4th Cir.1996).
Allen also contends the district court demonstrated bias against him. However, he has presented no evidence of any improper statements or conduct by the district court.
Accordingly, we affirm Allen's conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented in the materials before the court.
AFFIRMED.