Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Remijio MARTINEZZAMBRANO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-06-04
Citations: 36 F. App'x 120
Docket Number: No. 01-4885
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Remijio MARTINEZ-ZAMBRANO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 36
Pages: 120–120

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Remijio MARTINEZ-ZAMBRANO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-4885.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 7, 2002.
Decided June 4, 2002.
Jeffrey B. Welty, Poyner & Spruill, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina; E. Fitzgerald Parnell, III, Poyner & Spruill, L.L.P., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Jose Remijio Martinez-Zambrano appeals his jury convictions for one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana and seven counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841, 846 (West 1999 & Supp.2001), and concurrent sentences of seventy-eight months' imprisonment on each count. We affirm.
We find the prosecutor's comments during her rebuttal closing arguments were not plainly erroneous. See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732-37, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993). We conclude the remarks did not amount to improper bolstering, vouching, or reference to materials outside the record and were neither improper nor prejudicial. See United States v. Wilson, 135 F.3d 291, 297 (4th Cir.1998); United States v. Mitchell, 1 F.3d 235, 239, 241-42 (4th Cir.1993).
Therefore, we affirm Martinez-Zambra-no's convictions and sentences. 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.