Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02075/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02075-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lester Jefferson
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern

District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2075

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Northern District of Iowa.

*

Lester Jefferson, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Defendant-Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: November 14, 2006

Filed: November 22, 2006 

___________

Before BYE, JOHN R. GIBSON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lester Jefferson appeals his conviction for being a felon in possession of a

firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Jefferson contends there was

insufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding he possessed the gun. For the

reasons discussed below, we affirm the district court.1

Appellate Case: 06-2075 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/22/2006 Entry ID: 2112005
-2-

In the early morning of December 26, 2005, after an altercation at a bar with

Orlando Fisher, Jefferson and his cousin Demarco Harris drove to the Fisher

residence. During an ensuing argument in Mr. Fisher’s driveway, both Mr. Fisher and

his wife heard Harris repeatedly ask Jefferson to “give [him] the gun” and saw him

attempt to reach into Jefferson’s coat. They heard Jefferson respond by saying “No”

and saw him move his arm and hold his coat. Shortly thereafter, Mrs. Fisher called

the police. Upon arriving at the scene, Waterloo Police Sergeant Frank Krogh

observed Jefferson and Harris walking down the Fisher driveway and observed Mr.

Fisher holding a baseball bat, pointing towards Jefferson and Harris, and yelling:

“He’s got a gun!” Sergeant Krogh twice ordered Jefferson to stop and he did not

comply. Sergeant Krogh observed Jefferson turn into a neighbor’s driveway and walk

around the driver’s side of a parked van. At this time, Waterloo Police Officer Albert

Bovy arrived on the scene and observed Jefferson walking away from Sergeant Krogh

and toward the van. From her porch, Mrs. Fisher saw Jefferson walk down the

neighbor’s driveway and, while standing in front of the van, bend down and toss

something under the van. At this point, Officer Bovy drew his weapon and ordered

Jefferson to come out. Jefferson complied, walking from the front of the van around

the passenger’s side and onto the sidewalk. Shortly thereafter, Sergeant Krogh

surveyed the scene. As it had just snowed that night, the ground was covered with

light fresh snow. Both Sergeant Krogh and Officer Bovy observed a single set of

footprints in the snow around the van. Sergeant Krogh followed Jefferson’s footprints

around the van and found a handgun under the front of the van near the passenger

front tire. 

“The standard of review of an appeal concerning sufficiency of the evidence is

very strict, and the verdict of the jury should not be overturned lightly.” United States

v. Espino, 317 F.3d 788, 791 (8th Cir. 2003). We view the evidence in the light most

favorable to the verdict, resolving evidentiary conflicts in favor of the government and

accepting all reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence which support the jury’s

Appellate Case: 06-2075 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/22/2006 Entry ID: 2112005
-3-

verdict. Id. at 792. We will reverse only if no reasonable jury could have found the

accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

Jefferson contends there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding

he possessed the handgun because no witness saw him in possession of a firearm or

heard him say he had a firearm. Furthermore, he notes no effort was made to compare

his footprints with those in the snow and, although the gun was analyzed for

fingerprints, no usable prints were found. We are not persuaded by Jefferson’s

arguments. We have repeatedly held there is sufficient evidence to support a

conviction for felon in possession where a gun was immediately recovered from the

location where the defendant was observed dropping something. See United States

v. Light, 406 F.3d 995, 998 (8th. Cir. 2005) (finding sufficient evidence of possession

where officers and bystanders observed the defendant drop several items on the

ground during pursuit and a bystander recovered a firearm from the location where the

bystander observed the defendant stumble and the officers observed him drop

something); United States v. Echols, 144 F.3d 584, 585 (8th Cir. 1998) (finding

sufficient evidence where officers pursued the defendant, observed him reach for his

waistband as he fled, apprehended him, struggled with him, and recovered a revolver

in the alley where the struggle occurred); United States v. Rankin, 902 F.2d 1344,

1345-46 (8th Cir. 1990) (finding sufficient evidence where two officers observed the

defendant bring his hands to the front of his waist and drop a dark object and an

officer later found a dark handgun at that location). The only cognizable difference

between these cases and the one at hand, is the fact that a bystander rather than an

officer observed Jefferson drop something. This is insufficient to render the abovecited cases distinguishable. To the extent Jefferson challenges the credibility of either

Mrs. Fisher or the officers, it is well-settled the credibility of witnesses is a matter to

be resolved by the jury rather than by this court on review. Echols, 144 F.3d at 585.

Jefferson’s argument regarding the absence of useable fingerprints on the firearm

meets a similar fate. See Light, 406 F.3d at 995 (finding sufficient evidence under

similar facts where no usable prints were found on the gun after it was recovered). 

Appellate Case: 06-2075 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/22/2006 Entry ID: 2112005
-4-

Our review of the record reveals a wealth of circumstantial evidence showing

possession—much more evidence than in the above-cited cases. Here, in addition to

testimony Jefferson dropped something at the gun’s location, officers testified they

observed a lone set of footprints in the freshly driven snow leading to and from this

location. Furthermore, Mr. and Mrs. Fisher testified Harris asked Jefferson to “give

[him] the gun” and saw Harris attempt to reach into Jefferson’s coat. Jefferson

responded by saying “No,” moving his arm and holding his coat. The jury could have

characterized this response as an adoptive admission. See United States v. Kehoe, 310

F.3d 579, 590-91 (8th Cir. 2002) (finding bystander’s statement to be the defendant’s

own, because he did not contradict or deny it). We conclude the record is replete with

evidence sufficient to support Jefferson’s conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

We therefore affirm the district court.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-2075 Page: 4 Date Filed: 11/22/2006 Entry ID: 2112005