[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 12-12479

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 6:11-cr-00404-JA-GJK-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LAVELL DASHAN BROWN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(February 22, 2013)

Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, MARTIN and FAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Appellant Lavell Brown appeals his conviction on one count of conspiracy 

to distribute and possess with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 

Case: 12-12479 Date Filed: 02/22/2013 Page: 1 of 3 
2

U.S.C. § 846. On appeal, he argues that on cross-examination the prosecutor

violated the Federal Rules of Evidence by questioning him concerning his prior 

felony convictions, and this resulted in an unfair trial. 

We normally review for abuse of discretion a decision to admit evidence of 

prior convictions. United States v. Pritchard, 973 F.2d 905, 908 (11th Cir. 1992). 

However, if an argument is not raised before the district court, we review for plain 

error only. United States v. Bacon, 598 F.3d 772, 777 (11th Cir. 2010). The party 

challenging the error has the burden of demonstrating plain error on appeal. Id. 

Under plain error review, we will reverse only if the defendant establishes that: 

(1) there is an error; (2) the error is plain or obvious; (3) the error affects his 

substantial rights; and (4) the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or 

public reputation of a judicial proceeding. Id.

A felony conviction less than 10 years old “must be admitted in a criminal 

case in which the witness is a defendant, if the probative value of the evidence 

outweighs its prejudicial effect to that defendant.” Fed. R. Evid. 609(a)(1)(B).

Given the plain meaning of Rule 609, we conclude that no error resulted 

from the introduction of the prior felony convictions. Brown has failed to show 

that the convictions were more than 10 years old or that the probative value of the 

evidence did not outweigh the prejudicial effect. 

Case: 12-12479 Date Filed: 02/22/2013 Page: 2 of 3 
3

Brown has not demonstrated plain error because he has failed to cite to a 

single case establishing that the questions asked by the prosecutor on crossexamination were improper. Finally, even if plain error did occur, the error did not 

affect Brown’s substantial rights because of the overwhelming evidence against 

him at trial. See United State v. Lacayo, 758 F.2d 1559, 1565-66 (11th Cir. 1985). 

In this case, a witness testified directly that he had an agreement with Brown to 

receive marijuana through the mail. Brown did not dispute that the packages were 

delivered to his home, and that he personally received at least one of the packages. 

Brown also did not dispute that he gave to a member of the drug distribution ring a 

note with his address and the name “Richard Grant” in order to receive the 

packages. Additionally, Brown did not contest his three prior felony convictions, 

including one for drugs. Accordingly, we affirm Brown’s conviction.

AFFIRMED.

Case: 12-12479 Date Filed: 02/22/2013 Page: 3 of 3