United States of America, Appellee v. Rudolph v. Norris, Appellant, 48 F.3d 563 (D.C. Cir. 1995)

This case came to be heard on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was briefed and argued by counsel. The issues have been accorded full consideration by the Court and occasion no need for a published opinion. See D.C. Cir. Rule 36(b). Appellant has not demonstrated that prejudice resulted from the expert testimony at trial regarding the intent of the individual who possessed the 291 ziplock bags of crack cocaine. Intent to distribute was never challenged at trial, and evidence on the question of intent was overwhelming. Appellant has thus failed to establish plain error, see United States v. Mitchell, 996 F.2d 419, 422 (D.C. Cir. 1993), and it is therefore

ORDERED and ADJUDGED by the Court that appellant's convictions are affirmed.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 41.