United States v. Rolondo Clark

Type

Opinion

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

June 21, 2022

Case

United States v. Rolondo Clark

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 22a0249n.06 No. 21-1316 FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Jun 21, 2022 FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR v. ) THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ) MICHIGAN ROLONDO CLARK, ) Defendant-Appellant. ) OPINION ) Before: BOGGS, MOORE, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. A jury convicted Rolondo Clark of possession with intent to distribute 28 grams or more of cocaine and cocaine base. On appeal, he challenges the district court’s decision to admit evidence of his prior drug-dealing conviction under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). He also argues that the proof presented at trial is not sufficient to support his conviction. Because the overwhelming evidence of Clark’s guilt forecloses both arguments, we affirm. I. In 2016, Clark pleaded guilty to illegal delivery of a controlled substance analogue in Michigan state court. After serving his prison time, he was released on parole. Clark soon tested positive for cocaine. Around the same time, his parole officer found a picture of “large stacks of cash” on his phone. The positive test, cou…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.