
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marcus B. BROADWAY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-4939.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 30, 2002.
    Decided June 21, 2002.
    Frederick H. Marsh, Hill, Tucker, & Marsh, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul F. McNulty, United States Attorney, Stephen W. Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Marcus Broadway was convicted by a jury of possession with intent to distribute cocaine, 21 U.S.C.A. § 841 (West 1999 & Supp.2001), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c) (West 2000). He was sentenced to 170 months imprisonment. On appeal, he maintains that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for the firearms charge. We affirm.

This court must affirm the conviction if there is substantial evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, to support the verdict. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942). In determining whether the evidence is substantial, this court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government and inquires whether there is evidence sufficient to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir.1996) (en banc). In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence, this court does not review witness credibility and assumes the fact finder resolved all contradictions in the evidence in the Government’s favor. United States v. Romer, 148 F.3d 359, 364 (4th Cir.1998). The fact finder, not the reviewing court, weighs the credibility of the evidence and resolves any conflicts in the evidence presented, and if the evidence supports different reasonable interpretations, the jury decides which to believe. United States v. Murphy, 35 F.3d 143, 148 (4th Cir.1994).

We have reviewed the record and we find sufficient evidence to support Broadway’s firearm conviction. Accordingly, we affirm Broadway’s conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.  