PER CURIAM:*

Shannon Mayfield appeals his conviction of, and sentence for, aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine. Mayfield argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, because there was no evidence that he

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

No. 01-21262 knew of the presence of the cocaine in his vehicle. He also contends that he should not have received a two-level adjustment under the Sentencing Guidelines for obstruction of justice.

Because Mayfield did not renew his motion for a judgment of acquittal at the close of evidence, our review of the sufficiency of the evidence is limited to determining whether there was a manifest miscarriage of justice. United States v. Johnson, 87 F.3d 133, 136 (5th Cir. 1996). In light of the ample evidence of Mayfield’s knowing involvement in the cocaine transaction, this standard has not been met.

The district court did not clearly err in determining that Mayfield had committed perjury and suborned perjury at trial, thus warranting the adjustment for obstruction of justice. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1; United States v. Storm, 36 F.3d 1289, 1295 (5th Cir. 1994). This determination did not impinge on Mayfield’s right to defend himself. See United States v. Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87, 96 (1993); United States v. Como, 53 F.3d 87, 89 (5th Cir. 1995).

AFFIRMED.