Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-41036/USCOURTS-ca5-14-41036-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Richard Demarshaf Menyweather
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41036

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RICHARD DEMARSHAF MENYWEATHER,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-233-1

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Richard Demarshaf Menyweather appeals his jury trial conviction for 

being a felon in possession of a firearm. He contends that the district court 

abused its discretion in admitting police officer testimony as lay opinion 

testimony rather than expert testimony.

We review the district court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion, 

subject to harmless error review. United States v. Ebron, 683 F.3d 105, 133 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 17, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 14-41036 Document: 00513082284 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/17/2015
No. 14-41036

2

(5th Cir. 2012). The officers testified that flight from police is evidence of 

consciousness of guilt and that they did not believe the firearm needed to be 

fingerprinted in light of the strength of the evidence indicating that 

Menyweather had possessed the firearm. Contrary to Menyweather’s 

argument, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the 

officers’ testimony as lay opinion testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 

701. See FED. R. EVID. 701; Ebron, 683 F.3d at 136-38. Moreover, any error 

was harmless because there is not a reasonable possibility that their testimony

contributed to the conviction in light of the other strong evidence of 

Menyweather’s guilt. See United States v. Mendoza-Medina, 346 F.3d 121, 127 

(5th Cir. 2003). 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case: 14-41036 Document: 00513082284 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/17/2015