Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Following a jury trial, Jordan Ashton was convicted of aiding and abetting interference with commerce through robbery and possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. The district court sentenced him to a below-guidelines term of 84 months in prison and three years of supervised release.
On appeal, Ashton argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish the intent required for the aiding-and-abetting robbery charge. Because he had not presented that argument to the district court, the Fifth Circuit reviewed only for a manifest miscarriage of justice.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment. Under the applicable standard, the panel could overturn the verdict only if the record contained no evidence pointing to guilt or the evidence on a key element was so tenuous that the conviction would be shocking.
The court concluded that this demanding standard was not met. Trial evidence that Ashton acted as a lookout and getaway driver was sufficient to sustain his conviction for aiding and abetting the robbery.
Key Takeaways
- An unpreserved sufficiency argument received manifest-miscarriage-of-justice review.
- Evidence that Ashton served as a lookout and getaway driver supported the jury’s finding of guilt.
- The Fifth Circuit affirmed both the conviction and the district court’s judgment.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the exceptionally difficult standard defendants face when they raise an unpreserved sufficiency challenge on appeal. Evidence of conduct facilitating a robbery—including acting as a lookout and getaway driver—can sustain an aiding-and-abetting conviction under that standard.