Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Odies M. COLE, Jr., Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-06-01
Citations: 10 F. App'x 393
Docket Number: No. 00-3260
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Odies M. COLE, Jr., Appellant.
Judges: Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD and HEANEY, Circuit Judges, and BATTEY, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 10
Pages: 393–393

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Odies M. COLE, Jr., Appellant.
No. 00-3260.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted March 14, 2001.
Filed June 1, 2001.
Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD and HEANEY, Circuit Judges, and BATTEY, District Judge.
. The Honorable Richard H. Battey, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Odies M. Cole, Jr. (Cole) appeals the district court's admission of his confession and a statement by the victim into evidence. Cole also claims that the government produced insufficient evidence to support the verdict. In a separate pro se brief, Cole makes several additional allegations, which include grand juror misconduct, a lack of jurisdiction pursuant to the commerce clause, and ineffective assistance of counsel.
We review the district court's evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Phelps, 168 F.3d 1048, 1054 (8th Cir.1999). Furthermore, Cole's conviction must be upheld if there is substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict. See United States v. Sandifer, 188 F.3d 992, 995 (8th Cir.1999) (the evidence is to be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, giving the verdict the benefit of all reasonable inferences, and reversing only if the jury must have had a reasonable doubt concerning one of the essential elements of the crime.) Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that the district court's admission of the confession and statement of the victim into evidence was not an abuse of discretion. We also conclude that substantial evidence did exist to support the conviction.
As for the separate pro se brief, we conclude that Cole's ineffective assistance of counsel claims should be presented in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding. See United States v. Martin, 59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir.1995). The remaining claims of Cole's pro se brief are dismissed as frivolous. Accordingly, without further discussion, we affirm Cole's conviction. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.