US v. Ronnie Cupp, No. 14-4639 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-4639 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RONNIE EDWARD CUPP, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:13-cr-00022-NKM-11) Submitted: February 25, 2015 Decided: March 19, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Seth C. Weston, LAW OFFICE OF SETH C. WESTON, PLC, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Timothy J. Heaphy, United States Attorney, Ashley B. Neese, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ronnie Edward Cupp appeals his conviction and 204-month sentence imposed after a jury found him guilty of conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute oxycodone, methadone, amphetamine, buprenorphine, in oxymorphone, violation (b)(1)(C), 846 (2012). of 21 hydromorphone U.S.C. or §§ 841(a)(1), Cupp’s sole argument on appeal is that the district court erred when it denied his Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 motion for judgment of acquittal. Finding no error, we affirm. We review de novo the denial of a Rule 29 motion. States v. Jaensch, 665 F.3d 83, 93 (4th Cir. 2011). challenging burden.” the sufficiency of the evidence United A defendant faces “a heavy United States v. McLean, 715 F.3d 129, 137 (4th Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted). The jury verdict must be sustained if “there is substantial evidence in the record, when viewed in the light most favorable to the government, to support the quotation conviction.” marks omitted). Jaensch, 665 “Substantial F.3d at evidence 93 (internal is evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” omitted). Id. (internal quotation marks and brackets “Reversal for insufficient evidence is reserved for the rare case where the prosecution’s failure is clear.” 2 United States v. Ashley, 606 F.3d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted). It is well settled that to convict Cupp of conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute narcotics, the Government had to prove the following essential elements: “(1) an agreement between two or more persons to engage in conduct that violates a federal drug law; (2) the defendant’s knowledge of the conspiracy; and (3) the defendant’s knowing and voluntary participation in the conspiracy.” Green, 599 F.3d 360, 367 (4th Cir. 2010). United States v. We have reviewed the record and have considered Cupp’s arguments and find no error in the district court’s decision to deny Cupp’s Rule 29 motion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
