The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
25-4333•United States of America v. Damian Antheny Costello
25-4333Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 30, 2026
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-4333
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAMIAN ANTHENY COSTELLO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:24-cr-00003-GMG-RWT-21)
Submitted: May 20, 2026 Decided: June 30, 2026
Before NIEMEYER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Richard W. Weston, WESTON INJURY LAW, PLLC, Huntington, West
Virginia, for Appellant. Matthew L. Harvey, United States Attorney, Lara K. Omps-
Botteicher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Defendant Damian Costello appeals from his conviction after a jury trial on charges
of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute fentanyl,
methamphetamine, cocaine, and cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and
846.
On appeal, Costello challenges an isolated remark by a prosecutor as improper
vouching, as well as the district court’s application of two separate sentencing
enhancements. However, Costello made no relevant objections before the district court, so
we review for plain error. United States v. Dawson, 587 F.3d 640, 645 (4th Cir. 2009).
Having reviewed the record with that stringent standard in mind, we find no reversible
error.
Accordingly, we affirm his conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.