Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-04196/USCOURTS-ca8-05-04196-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dean Wade Guenther
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of

Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-4196

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Dean Wade Guenther, *

*

Defendant-Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: November 15, 2006

Filed: December 7, 2006

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, LAY and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

LAY, Circuit Judge.

Dean Wade Guenther appeals his conviction following a jury trial in district

court1

 on one count of being a felon in possession of firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g)(1). Guenther contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the

jury’s finding that he actually or constructively possessed firearms stolen from a

home. We affirm.

Appellate Case: 05-4196 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/07/2006 Entry ID: 2116519
2

As the government lacked jurisdiction over the burglary, it did not charge

Guenther with that crime. 

-2-

BACKGROUND

In June 2003 Karen Prescher discovered that her home had been burglarized

while she was out of town. Several guns, rings, blank checks, and a safe containing

documents were taken. The gun cabinet from which the guns were taken had on it a

latent fingerprint that matched Guenther’s print.

Shortly after the burglary, Guenther visited the home of a friend, Sheryl Hill

Desjarlait. He brought with him Prescher’s checkbook, ring, and documents

apparently taken from her home. He told Desjarlait and Cassandra Kingbird, who

lived with Desjarlait, that he had stolen the checks and gave them some of Prescher’s

blank checks for their use. Kingbird testified that Guenther told her that a car parked

in Desjarlait’s yard contained guns in its trunk, and that he planned to sell them. 

Other items taken in the burglary were recovered in circumstances linking them

to Guenther. For example, the stolen safe was found in a storage area next to a car

containing documents bearing Guenther’s name, including court documents and

checks made out to him. A key ring holding Prescher’s safe key was recovered from

Desjarlait’s home. The key ring also held the key to the trunk of the car parked in

Desjarlait’s yard. 

On December 14, 2004, Guenther was charged by indictment with one count

of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The government alleged that Guenther

burglarized2

 Prescher’s residence, taking her guns and therefore possessing them.

Guenther proceeded to trial on May 23, 2005, was found guilty by the jury, and

sentenced to 327 months of imprisonment based on his extensive criminal history.

This appeal followed.

Appellate Case: 05-4196 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/07/2006 Entry ID: 2116519
-3-

ANALYSIS

Guenther challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to convict him of

possessing the stolen firearms. “We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo,

viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the government, resolving conflicts

in the government’s favor, and accepting all reasonable inferences that support the

verdict.” United States v. Washington, 318 F.3d 845, 852 (8th Cir. 2003). This is a

strict standard of review. “We may reverse only if no reasonable jury could have

found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. 

Convicting Guenther of being a felon in possession of a firearm requires proof

that (1) he had previously been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of

imprisonment exceeding one year; (2) he knowingly possessed a firearm; and (3) the

firearm had been in or had affected interstate commerce. United States v. Brown, 422

F.3d 689, 691-92 (8th Cir. 2005). A firearm may be possessed actually or

constructively and such possession may be sole or joint. United States v. Walker, 393

F.3d 842, 846-47 (8th Cir. 2005). Constructive possession of a firearm is established

if Guenther had control over the place where the firearm was located, or control,

ownership, or dominion over the firearm itself. Id. at 847.

Guenther concedes that he is a felon and that the stolen firearms moved in

interstate commerce. He challenges only the government’s evidence that he possessed

the firearms. The jury received evidence in many forms—forensic, physical, and

testimonial—that supports its finding. Guenther’s actions and statements following

the burglary support a conclusion that he took property from the Prescher residence.

He brought items taken from Prescher’s home to Desjarlait’s residence and gave her

stolen checks to use. The recovery of the stolen safe near a car connected with

Guenther further links him to the burglary.

Appellate Case: 05-4196 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/07/2006 Entry ID: 2116519
-4-

Most importantly, the jury heard evidence connecting Guenther to the guns

taken from Prescher’s home. Guenther’s fingerprint on the cabinet from which the

guns were stolen is highly persuasive evidence that he stole, and thus possessed, the

firearms. Guenther’s statement to Desjarlait that the car parked in her yard contained

guns that he planned to sell bolsters this conclusion. Although the car did not belong

to Guenther, the recovery of the key to its trunk on the same key ring as Prescher’s

safe key permits a conclusion that Guenther exercised control over the contents of the

trunk. 

We conclude that this record contains sufficient evidence to support the jury’s

conclusion that Guenther possessed the firearms. See United States v. Howard, 413

F.3d 861, 864-65 (8th Cir. 2005) (substantial evidence supported verdict where

defendant made inculpatory statements, defendant’s vehicle was seen in vicinity of

burglary, and stolen guns were recovered from the vehicle). The evidence does not

permit only the conclusion, as Guenther argues, that he was merely physically

proximate to the firearms. It reasonably permits the conclusion that Guenther

deliberately stole, possessed, and subsequently disposed of the firearms. 

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated herein, we affirm Guenther’s conviction.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-4196 Page: 4 Date Filed: 12/07/2006 Entry ID: 2116519