N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lle e , v. KENNETH OSTEEN, AKA Ken B one ,

De fe nda nt-Appe l la

nt. No. 20-50261

D.C . No. 2:19-c r-00585-JFW -1
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia John F. W a lte r, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d De c e m

be r 8, 2021 ** Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : W . FLETC HER , R AW LINSON, a

nd OW ENS, C i rc u it Judge s. 

# F IL ED DEC 16 2021 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).Ke nne th Oste e n (Oste e n) a ppe a l s his c onvic tion, following a jury tria l, of viola ting 18 U.S.C . § 922(g)(1) (fe l on in posse ssion of fire arm and a m m unition). Oste e n c o nte nds tha

t, a lthough the

e vide nc e at tria l m a

y have be e n suffic ie nt to show his knowle dge of the fire arm and inte nt to e xe rc ise c o ntrol ove r it, the
e vide nc e did not de m onstra te his powe r to a c tua lly

e xe rc i se c ontrol ove r the fire arm . W e re vie w de novo thedistric t c ourt’ s de nia l of Oste e n’ s m otion for
a c quitta l a sse rting a

la c k of suffic ie nt e vide nc e to support his c onvic t ion. Se e Unite d State s v . Gagarin , 950 F.3d 596, 602 (9th C ir. 2020). W e will uphold a
c onvic tion if, “vie wing thee vide nc e in the light most fa v ora ble to the prose c ution,
any rationa l trie r of fa c t c ould ha ve found thee s se ntia l e le m e nts of thec rim e prove d be y ond a re a sona ble doubt.” Unite d State

s v . Bailon-Santana , 429 F.3d 1258, 1262 (9th C ir. 2005) (c ita tion omitte d). Oste e n would bec onside re d to ha ve e x e rc ise d c ontrol ove r the fire a rm if he
c onstruc tive l y

posse s se d it. “ C onstruc tive posse ssion is e sta blishe d whe n a

pe rson, though la c king . . . phy sic a l c u stody , still ha s the powe r and inte nt to e xe rc i se c ontrol ove r the obje c t. . . .” H e nde rson v . Unite d State

s , 575 U.S. 622, 626 (2015) (c ita tions omitte d ). B a s e d on the e vide nc e at tria l, a rat iona l trie r of fa c t c ould find that Oste e n c o nstruc tive ly

posse sse d the fire arm

and a m m unition. On re c ordings
2m a de while he wa s in ja il, Oste e n is he ard sa y i ng tha t he ha d “ a

ne w thing a

t the house ” whic h he de sc ribe d a s “ Ninth Stre e t.” He sta

te d tha t it wa s “brand ne w,” ha d “ like 15 or 16 pa sse n ge rs,” and urge d the pe rson on theothe r e n d to “ find
som e body

to se ll it,”e xpla ining tha t he ne e de d “ like five or six” for it. At m ultiple tim e s Oste e n re pe ate dly

re fe rre d to the “ ne w thing”a s be longing to him
. Los Ange le s She riff’ s De pa rtm e nt De t e c tive M c Ga

ughe y de c ode d the la ngua ge use d by Oste e n during thec a lls, a n d inform e d

the jury tha t Oste e n’ s ja rgon a c tua lly

re fe re nc e d a

fire arm . De t e c tive M c Ga ughe y a lso te stifie d to
e xe c uting a

wa rrant a t Oste e n’ s hom e ba s e d on the inform ation ga the re d from

the
c a lls a n d finding a

gun loa de d with 15 bullet s. Give n the re c orde d c a lls, thede te c tive ’ s te s tim ony , a nd the se iz e d fire arm , a rationa l trie r of fa c t c o uld ha v e found tha

t Oste e n, though lac king phy sic a l
c ustody , ha d the powe r a

nd inte nt to e xe rc ise c o ntrol ove r the fire a rm . Se e id. The re fore , suffic ie nt e v i de nc e e xiste d to support Oste e n’ s c onvic tion. Se e Gagarin , 950 F.3d a

t 602. AFFIRM E D
.

3