James Edward Clay appeals his convictions for the transportation of stolen vehicles, sale or receipt of stolen vehicles as well as conspiracy to commit the same. Clay argues there was insufficient evidence to convict him. Further, he asserts the trial court erred when it did not declare a mistrial after an improper question by the prosecution and commentary by the court.

This Court has scrutinized the record thoroughly and has determined that Clay’s arguments are without merit. There was clearly sufficient evidence to support the verdict and the trial court properly gave a curative instruction after the improper question by government counsel. Under Eighth Circuit Rule 47B, no further commentary is necessary.

Accordingly, we affirm.