evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). We must uphold the jury’s verdict if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict when viewing the evidence most favorable to the Government. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942); United States v. Beidler, 110 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir.1997). Substantial evidence is “evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” United (4th Cir.2005)(refusing to overturn a conspiracy conviction merely because a co-conspirator was acquitted by the same jury); United States v. Thomas, 900 F.2d 37, 40 (4th Cir.1990)(<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Andrews, 850 F.2d
holding that a potential conflict was present necessitating reversal of defendants conviction holding that a prior acquittal does not preclude the admission of evidence of a defendants other alleged crimes in a prosecution for the bank robbery on the basis of collateral estoppel principles because    the prior acquittal did not determine an ultimate issue in the present case holding that an acquittal of sole coconspirator does not re quire reversal of defendants conviction holding coconspirator hearsay exception does not violate confrontation clause holding the acquittal of several jointly tried codefendants in a conspiracy case was not grounds for reversing the conviction of a codefendant and alleged coconspirator