Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Cochran, 01-51090 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 01-51090 Visitors: 28
Filed: Aug. 02, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-51090 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DARLA KAY COCHRAN, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-00-CR-1672-ALL-EP - August 2, 2002 Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Darla Kay Cochran appeals from her conviction of importing marijuana and possessing with intent to distribute marijuan
More
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                                  No. 01-51090
                                Summary Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DARLA KAY COCHRAN,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant.

                          --------------------
             Appeal from the United States District Court
                   for the Western District of Texas
                     USDC No. EP-00-CR-1672-ALL-EP
                          --------------------
                             August 2, 2002

Before JONES, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

            Darla   Kay   Cochran     appeals    from   her   conviction   of

importing    marijuana    and    possessing   with   intent   to   distribute

marijuana.     She contends that the prosecutor’s remark during

closing arguments that jurors were the “they” in the question “‘why

don’t they do something about drug smuggling in our community?’”

deprived her of a fair trial and violated the Due Process Clause.

Cochran’s contention is unconvincing.           Even if it is assumed that

the prosecutor’s remark went beyond an appropriate appeal to act as


     *
         Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
                           No. 01-51090
                                -2-

the conscience of the community, the remark was not inflammatory;

the jury’s actions during deliberations indicated that it was

focused on the evidence in the case; the district court instructed

the jury that it must consider only the evidence and the remarks of

counsel were not evidence; and the evidence against Cochran was

strong.   United States v. Lankford, 
196 F.3d 563
, 574 (5th Cir.

1999), cert. denied, 
529 U.S. 1119
(2000).

          AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer