Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tony Lee JONES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-10-07
Citations: 110 F. App'x 336
Docket Number: No. 04-4236
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tony Lee JONES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 110
Pages: 336–337

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tony Lee JONES, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-4236.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 29, 2004.
Decided: Oct. 7, 2004.
Jennifer M. Newman, Law Offices of Jennifer M. Newman, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant.
Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Brian Whisler, Michael C. Wallace, Sr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tony Lee Jones appeals his convictions for three counts of distribution of cocaine base with a resulting ninety-eight month sentence. Finding no error, we affirm.
Jones's sole contention on appeal is that insufficient evidence supported his convictions. To determine if there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction, this court considers whether, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, substantial evidence supports the jury's verdict. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942); United States v. Wills, 346 F.3d 476, 495 (4th Cir.2003), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 2906, 159 L.Ed.2d 816 (2004). Substantial evidence is defined as "that evidence which 'a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.' " United States v. Newsome, 322 F.3d 328, 333 (4th Cir.2003) (quoting United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862-63 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc)). The court reviews both direct and circumstantial evidence and permits "the [Gjovernment the benefit of all reasonable inferences from the facts proven to those sought to be established." United States v. Tresvant, 677 F.2d 1018, 1021 (4th Cir.1982). Witness credibility is within the sole province of the jury, and the court will not reassess the credibility of testimony. United States v. Saunders, 886 F.2d 56, 60 (4th Cir.1989).
We have fully reviewed the materials submitted by the parties and find that sufficient evidence existed to support the convictions. Accordingly, we affirm. 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