[UNPUBLISHED]
PER CURIAM.
In this direct criminal appeal, Gregory Lamont Charles contends the district court committed reversible error by refusing to declare a mistrial and by allowing the government to bolster the testin’ iv of one of its witnesses. Having satisfieü ourselves that the district court correctly resolved Charles’s challenges and that the appeal simply involves the fixation of settled principles of law to unique iacts, we conclude the issues do not warrant a comprehensive opinion. We thus reject Charles’s contentions and affirm his conviction without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.