FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT MARCH 29, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK

Honora ble Melvin Br

unetti, United States Circuit Judg e for the Ninth Circuit, sitt ing by * designation. [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]

I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 04- 16706

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 0 - 0 0 1 0 1 - CR- T- 2 7 M SS U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s E D W A R D T H O M A S , a .k .a . E d T h o m a s , a .k .a . J o h n D a w s o n , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ar c h 29, 2006) B efo re B IR C H , C A RN E S an d B R U N E T T I , C i rcu i tJu d g es. * P E R C U R I A M:This casewas originally schedule d for oral argument but was removed from the oral 1 argument calendar pursuant to 11th Cir. R. 34-3(f). 2 D e f e nda nt - appe l l a nt , E dw a r d T hom a s , appe a l s hi s c onvi c t i ons f or po ss es si on , by a c on vi ct ed fe l on , of am m un i t i on and a fi re arm thatw as u n r e g is te r e d . I n lig h t o f th e e v id e n c e p r e s e n te d , th e g o v e rn m e n t s u f f ic ie n tly p r o v e d th a t T h o m a s c o n s tru c tiv e ly p o s s e s s e d th e f ir e a rm a n d a m m u n itio n in th is ca se . M o re o v er , th e d istrict co u rt d idn o t ab u se it s d iscr etio n b y d en yin g T h o m as ’s m ot i on for m i stri albase d o n the go vernm ent ’ s c om m enti n i t s c l osi ng re bu tt al arg u m en t . A cco rd i n g l y, w e A F F IR M T h o m as’ s co n v i ct i o n s. 1 I . B AC KG RO UN D A fed eral g ran d j u ry i n d i ct ed T h o m as fo r p o ssessi o n o f am m u n i t i o n b y a conv i ct ed fe l on , i n v i ol at i on of 18 U . S . C . §§ 92 2(g)(1) and 92 4(e) (C ou ntO ne); pos s e s s i on of

af i r e a rm by ac onvi c t e d f

e l on, i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . §§ 922( g) ( 1) and 9 24 (e ) ( C ou ntT w o); and p osse ss i on of an un re gi st er ed fi re arm by a c on vi ct ed fe l on , i n v i ol at i on of 26 U . S . C . § 5 81 2 (C ou ntT hree ). P ri or t o tri al , T ho m as s t i pul a t e d tha the w a s ac onvi c t e d f e l on. I n i t s ope ni ng s t a t e m e nta ttr i a l , the go vernm entexpl ai ned that , i t“ need[ed] t o p rove beyond a r ea sonabl e dou btthat [T ho m as ] w as a c on vi ct ed fe l on atthe t i m e he posse ss ed the fi re arm [w hi ch w as an] un re gi st er ed shot gu n. ” R 3 at2-3. In hi s openi ng st at em ent , defe nse c ou nsel e x p la in e d th a t:3

on F ebruary6th o f 200 0, ov erfour and a hal f y ears ago, M r. T ho m as and som e f

ri ends had w entov ert o C l earw at er . A nd they had deci ded to ju s t h a n g o u t, a n d th e y e n d e d u p a t T h e C lu b M e r c e d e s in C le a rw a te r .

. . . N ow , M r . T hom a s w a s l e f ta tT he C l ub M e r c e de s , w hi c h i s nott oo far f rom the D ay s I nn ho t el . M r. T ho m as ’ s f ri ends i nd i ca t ed thatthey w o u ld b e b a c ks h o rtlyto p ic kh im up . M r . T h o m a s in d ic a te d to h is fr i ends thati f they di d n otre turn, then they c ou l d si m pl y f i nd hi m at th e D a y s I n n m o te l. A s t i m e began t o p as s, i tbeca m e l at e and , i n fac t , as M r. T ho m as s u s p e c te d , h is f

r ie n d s n e v e rr e tu rn e d to p ic kh im u p . M r . T h o m a s , in f a c t, w e n t to th e n e a rb y D a y s I n n to p o s s ib ly c h e c kin f o rth e n ig h t, because he had no other w ayho m e. W hi l e a tthe D ay s I nn m ot el , M r. T ho m as w as approached by l aw en fo rcem en tw h o b eg an t o q u est i o n h i s w h ereab o u t s. I d . a t 7 . O f f i c e rK e nne th K a nos ki t e s t i f i e d tha t , on the da y of

T hom a s ’ s a rr e s t , he a nd s e ve r a l othe runi t s ha d r e s ponde d t o the r e portof ac r i m i na l i nc i de nti nvol vi ng tw o b l ac k m al es i n a sm al l re d v ehi cl e. H e r eport ed cond uct i ng a s earc h o f a ve hi c l e m a t c hi ng the de s c r i pt i on w hi c h ha d be e n di s c ove r e d ne a ram ot e l . I ns i de the vehi cl e, he ob se rved an od or i nd i ca t i ng thata s ho t gu n m i gh tre ce nt l y have been f ir e d . T h e o f

f ic e ra ls o te s tif

ie d to f in d in g as p e n t s h o tg u n s h e ll in s id e th e v e h ic le w hi c h appe a r e d t o ha ve r e s ul t e d f r om as hotf

i r e d thr ough the f

l oorboa r d of

the ve hi c l e . O f

f i c e rK a nos ki de s c r i be d the r e c ove ry , f r om the a r e as urr oundi ng the v e h i c l e , o f

af l o we rd u f

f l e b a g th a tc o n t a i n e d “ as m a l l p ap e rb a g wi th ar e c e i p t , two4

b o x e s o f s h e lls f o rs h o tg u n s , [ a n d ] th e w e ap o n its e lf , th e s h o tg u n .” R 5 a t 7 4 - 7 5 . E a c h box of

a m m uni t i on w a s m a rke d w i th apr i c e of $5. 99. I d. a t77- 78. T he r e c e ip t, w h ic h w a s a ls o a d m itte d in to e v id e n c e , w a s f r o m “B ig E ’s G u n s ” in T am pa, F l ori da, l i st ed the t ot al am ou ntof the pu rc hase as $1 2. 79 , and w as si gn ed

“ E d T ho m as . ” E xh . 18 h. In a j ac ketnearthe other i t em s, O ff i ce r K anoski re po rt ed r e c ove r i ng w ha tappe a r e d t o be a n e m pl oy e e i de nt i f i c a t i on c a r d f

or“ H a rbor s i de R e f r ig e r a te d S e rv ic e s ” lis tin g th e n a m e “E d T h o m a s ” a n d T h o m a s ’s s o c ia l s e c u r ity n u m b e r . I d . a t 8 8 - 8 9 ; s e e a ls o E x h . 1 8 f . T he r e d ve hi c l e , aD odge S ha dow , a nd the othe ri t e m s w e r e a l l f ound t og ether i n C l earw at er , F l ori da. O ff i ce r K anoski adm i tt ed, ho w ever , thathe had n o tseen T h o m as i n o r aro u n d th e v eh i cl e. Id . at9 5 . O ffi cer K an o sk i al so e x p la in e d th a t a n o th e ro f f ic e ru s in g ad o g h a d b e e n u n ab le to lo c a te a n y p e r s o n in th e a r e aa s s o c ia te d w ith th e D o d g e S h a d o w . I d . a t 1 0 1 . O f f i c e rV i c t orB r i a n G oodr i c h ha d a l s o be e n di s pa t c he d t o the s c e ne of the in v e s tig a tio n to a s s is t w ith th e s e a r c h f o rth e tw o b la c km a le s . H e r e p o rte d th a t, on ce there , he j oi ned ano ther off i ce r w ho w as spea ki ng w i th a m an, i dent i fi ed as T h o m a s , wh o wa s “ o n o rn e a rap a y p h o n e a tth e Day s I n n . ” I d . a t1 2 7 . He t e s t i f i e d tha tthe m ot e l a nd pa y phone w e r e l oc a t e d be tw e e n 75 a nd 100 y a r ds f r om the D od ge S hado w . Id. at12 9. O ff i ce r G oo dri ch agree d thathe had n everse en5

T h o m a s in o ra r o u n d th e v e h ic le a n d th a t T h o m a s w a s c o o p e r a tiv e w ith que s t i oni ng. H e t e s t i f

i e d tha the di d notc he c k T hom a s f orgun pow de ra nd di d not r e c a l l w he the rT hom a s s m e l l e d l i ke gun pow de r . I d. a t135, 138. O ff i ce r K i m berl y M i l l en, a f orensi c s ci ence spec i al i st , t es t i fi ed thatshe had c ol l e c t e d appr oxi m a t e l y 69 pi e c e s of e vi de nc e a tthe s c e ne of the i nve s t i ga t i on a nd ha d tr i e d t o r e c ove rf

i nge rpr i nt s . I d. a t149. S he e xpl a i ne d tha t , f orava r i e ty of r e a s ons , i nc l udi ng t e xtur e , i ti s di f f i c ul tt o obt a i n f

i nge rpr i nt s f

r om f i r e a rm s . S he t e s t i f i e d tha t , a l though s he w a s unabl e t o r e c ove rf i nge rpr i nt s f

r om the r e c e i ptor a m m u n itio n , s h e w a s ab le to r e c o v e rs o m e f r o m o n e o f

th e b o x e s o f

a m m u n itio n . C a r ol P e rki ns D a vi s , w ho e xa m i ne d the s e f i nge rpr i nt s , t e s t i f

i e d tha ts he f

ound a

“ po si t i ve i dent i fi ca t i on t o the ri gh tthu m bp ri nt ” of T ho m as . Id. at21 5. M i chae l L a r oe , as pe c i a l a ge ntw i th the D e pa rtm e ntof J us t i c e B ur e au of

A l c ohol , T oba c c o, F irea rm s a n d E x p lo siv es , t es ti fied th at n o fire ar m s h ad b ee n re g istere d in T h o m as ’s na m e , tha tthe s hot gun r e c ove r e d s houl d ha ve be e n r e gi s t e r e d, a nd tha t , a c c or di ng t o T ho m as ’ s dri ver’ s l i ce nse, he re si ded i n T am pa, F l ori da. A t th e c lo s e o f

th e g o v e rn m e n t’s c a s e , T h o m a s a s k e d th e c o u rt to g r a n t a j ud gm entof ac qu i tt al on C ou nt s T w o and T hree on the grou nd thatno evi dence h a d b e e n p r e s e n te d s h o w in g th a t T h o m a s “p o s s e s s e d th e s h o tg u n .” R 6 a t a t 2 7 0 . T ho m as al so as ked for a j ud gm entof ac qu i tt al as t o C ou ntO ne on the grou nd that6

the r e c e i ptf

a i l e d t o s how tha tT hom a s e i the rpur c ha s e d the a m m uni t i on ort ook po ss es si on of i t . T he courtdeni ed T ho m as ’ s m ot i on , and T ho m as re st ed hi s c as e. I n its c lo s in g a r g u m e n t, th e g o v e rn m e n t r e ite r a te d th a t it “m u s t p r o v e th is c a s e be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubt . A nd the bur de n w i l l a l w a y s be w i th the gove rnm e nt . ” R 4 a t2. I n i t s r e butt a l a r gum e nta tc l os i ng, the gove rnm e nt obs e rve d: F urthe rm or e , the r e s t i l l ha s be e n no e xpl a na t i on, good e xpl a na t i on, lo g ic a l e x p la n a tio n a s to h o w th is d e f e n d a n t w a s in C le a rw a te rw h e n it show s he l i ves i n T am pa and, coi nci dent al l y, he’ s f ou nd a hun dred y a r d s in th is e x a c t s p o t, o u t o f a ll P in e lla s C o u n ty , h is id e n tif ic a tio n is f o u n d n e x t to ab a g th a t h a s e v id e n c e w ith h is f in g e rp r in t a n dh is s ig n a tu r e o n it. Id. at35 . T ho m as obj ec t ed t o thi s s t at em entby the go vernm entas an i m prop er c om m e nton T hom a s ’ s r i ghtt o r e m a i n s i l e nta nd a s as hi f t i ng of the bur de n of p r o o f . T h e c o u rt o v e rru le d th e o b je c tio n b e c au s e : T h e r e [ w a s ] n o g e n u in e is s u e in th is r e c o r d a s to w h e th e rth is d e f e n d a n t w a s in C le a rw a te r . H e w a s id e n tif ie d a n d a rr e s te d in C l earw at er . T he ar gu m ent , al tho ug h app ropri at el y obj ec t ed t o, do es notr i s e t o the l e ve l , i n m y vi e w , of s hi f t i ng the bur de n of

pr oof t o the de f e nda nt , norc om m e nt i ng on the de f e nda nt ’ s f

i f th a m e ndm e nt p r iv ile g e o f

n o t te s tif

y in g . I d . a t 3 8 . T h e c o u rt a ls o d e n ie d T h o m a s ’s r e q u e s t to p e r f e c t th e r e c o r d b e c au s e it h a d a lr e a d y ru le d o n th e is s u e . A f te rc lo s in g a r g u m e n ts , th e c o u rt in s tru c te d th e ju ry th a t:7

Itw i l l be your du ty t o d ec i de w hether the go vernm enthas proven be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubtthe s pe c i f i c f a c t s ne c e s s a ry t o f

i nd the d e f e n d a n t g u iltyo f

th e o f f e n s e s c h a r g e d in th e in d ic tm e n t.

. . . [Y ] ou m ustfol l ow al l of m y i nstruct i on s a s aw ho l e, as I i nd i ca t ed ea rlier. Y o u m ay n o t sin g le o u t o r d isre g ar d an y o f th e c o u rt’s i n stru ct i o n s.

. . . [ E ] ve ry de f

e nda nti s pr e s um e d by the l a w t o be i nnoc e nt . T he l a w doe s notr e qui r e ade f e nda ntt o pr ove i nnoc e nc e ort o pr oduc e a ny e v id e n c e a t a ll. A n d if

ad e f e n d a n t e le c ts n o t to te s tif y y o u c a n n o t c o n s id e rth a t in a ny w a y dur i ng y ourde l i be r a t i ons . T he gove rnm e ntha s the bur de n of prov i ng a def

endantgu i l ty bey on d a re as on abl e dou bt ; and i f i thas fai l ed t o d o so , yo u m u stfi n d th e d efen d an tn o tg u i l ty. R 6 at3 6 2 , 3 6 3 . T h e j u ry fo u n d T h o m as g u i l ty o n al l th ree co u n t s. T ho m as subm i tt ed a M ot i on for Jud gm entof A cqui tt al or A l t ernat i vel y N ew T r i a l D ue t o P r os e c ut or i a l M i s c onduc t , i n w hi c h he r e s t a t e d hi s pr e vi ous a r gum e nt re gardi ng the go vernm ent ’ s c om m enti n i t s c l osi ng re bu tt al re m arks. T he di stri ct c o u rt d e n ie d th e m o tio n , f in d in g th a t “a t w o r s t, th e p r o s e c u to r ’s c o m m e n t w a s in re spon se t o [the] offe r of proof [fr om T ho m as ’ s openi ng st at em ent ] , w hi ch [had no tbeen] forthcom i ng , ra ther than a com m enton [T ho m as ’ s] fa i l ure t o t es t i fy . ” R 1- 64 a t3. M or e ove r , the di s tr i c tc ourtf ound tha t , e ve n though the a r gum e nt s h o u ld n o t h a v e b e e n m a d e , it w a s n o t th e p r o s e c u to r ’s in te n tio n to r e f e rto T h o m a s ’s s ile n c e a n d th e c o m m e n t w a s n o t o f s u c h ac h a r a c te rth a t th e ju ry w o u ld n atu ra ll y a n d n ec es sa rily h av e tak en itto h av e b ee n a c o m m en t o n T h o m as ’s e x e r c is e o f

h is F if th A m e n d m e n t r ig h t.8

O n app ea l , T ho m as ar gu es that(1) the evi dence pres ent ed attri al w as in s u f f ic ie n t to s u p p o rt h is c o n v ic tio n s b e c au s e th e g o v e rn m e n t c o m p le te ly f a ile d to prov e thathe, ei ther a ctual l y or c on struct i vel y, po ss es se d ei ther the un re gi st er ed shot gu n o r the am m un i t i on and (2) the go vernm ent ’ s c om m entdu ri ng i t s r ebutt al a r gum e nti n c l os i ng w a s i m pr ope rs uc h tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d i n notgr a nt i ng T h o m a s ’s m o tio n f

o rju d g e m e n t o f

a c q u itta l, o ra lte rn a tiv e ly , an e w tr ia l. I I . DI S CUS S I ON A . S uffi ci encyof the E vi dence W e r e v ie w th e s u f

f ic ie n c y o f

th e e v id e n c e to s u p p o rt aju ry ’s g u iltyv e r d ic t d e n o v o , v ie w in g th a t e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e g o v e rn m e n t, r e s ol vi ng “ a l l r e a s onabl e i nf e r e nc e s a nd c r e di bi l i ty e va l ua t i ons i n f a vorof the ju ry ’s v e r d ic t.” U n ite d S ta te s v . C la y , 3 7 6 F .3 d 1 2 9 6 , 1 3 0 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) , c e rt. deni ed, __U . S . __ , 12 5 S . C t . 14 27 (200 5). W e “ m ustup ho l d the j ury’ s ver di ct w h e n e v e rar e a s o n ab le f a c tf in d e rc o u ld c o n c lu d e th a t th e e v id e n c e e s tab lis h e s g u ilt b e y o n d ar e a s o n ab le d o u b t.” I d . ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . T o c onvi c tade f

e nda ntof pos s e s s i on of

af i r e a rm by ac onvi c t e d f

e l on, the gove rnm e ntm us tpr ove , i nt e ra l i a , tha tthe de f e nda ntpos s e s s e d af

i r e a rm or am m un i t i on . 18 U . S . C . § 9 22 (g)( 1). T hi s m eans the go vernm entm ustprov e that the defendanthad ei ther a ctual or construct i ve po ss es si on of the fi re arm . S ee9

U ni t e d S t a t e s v. G unn, 369 F . 3d 1229, 1235 ( 11th C i r . ) ( pe rc ur i a m ) , c e rt . de ni e d,

__U . S . __ , 12 5 S . C t . 32 4 (20 04 ). W e e xp l ai ned that“ [a ] defe nd anthas c ons truc t i ve pos s e s s i on i f he e xe r c i s e s ow ne r s hi p, dom i ni on, orc ontr ol ove rthe f ir e a rm ,” o r“h a s th e p o w e ra n d in te n tio n to e x e r c is e d o m in io n o rc o n tr o l.” I d . T h e e v id e n c e th e g o v e rn m e n t p r e s e n te d to c o n v ic t T h o m a s s u f f ic ie n tly pr ove d tha tT hom a s c ons truc t i ve l y pos s e s s e d both the s hot gun a nd the am m u n i t i o n . O ffi cer G o o d ri ch t est i fi ed th atT h o m as w as fo u n d o u t si d e th e D ays Inn i n C l earw at er , F l ori da, st andi ng abou t75 t o 1 00 fe etaw ayfr om w here O ff i ce r K an o sk i h ad reco v ered a b ag th atco n t ai n ed a receipt, tw o b o x es o f sh o t g u n sh el l s, a nd as hot gun. T he r e c e i ptf r om “ B i g E ’ s G uns ” l i s t e d the t ot a l a m ountof the pur c ha s e a s $12. 79, a nd w a s s i gne d “ E d T hom a s . ” T he tw o boxe s of a m m uni t i on w e r e e a c h m a rk e d w ith ap r ic e o f $ 5 .9 9 , w h ic h , w ith th e a d d itio n o f ta x , a d d u p to a l i tt l e over $12 . 00 . M oreover, the fi ng erpri ntexam i ner t es t i fi ed thatshe had m a t c he d T hom a s ’ s r i ghtthum b pr i ntt o apr i ntt a ke n by O f f i c e rM i l l e n f

r om one of the boxe s of

a m m uni t i on. I n aj a c ke tf ound ne a rthe othe ri t e m s , O f f i c e rK a nos ki re co v er ed em p lo ye e id en ti fica ti o n th at li sted th e n am e “E d T h o m as ” a n d T h o m as ’s s o c ia l s e c u r ityn u m b e r . I n lig h t o f th is e v id e n c e , th e g o v e rn m e n t s u f f ic ie n tly e s t abl i s he d tha tT hom a s ha d ow ne r s hi p, dom i ni on, orc ontr ol ove rthe s hot gun a nd a m m u n itio n , o rth e p o w e ra n d in te n tio n to e x e r c is e s u c h d o m in io n o rc o n tr o l.10

B . P r o s e c u to r ia l C o m m e n t T ho m as nextar gu es thatthe prosec ut or’ s s t at em enti n cl osi ng w as an i m perm i ss i bl e c om m enton hi s F i fth A m endm entri gh tt o rem ai n si l ent , w as bu rden shi ft i ng , and, as such, const i tut ed prosec ut ori al m i sc on du ct . W e r evi ew a di stri ct c ourt ’ s de ni a l of

am ot i on f

oram i s tr i a l f

orabus e of

di s c r e t i on. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. E tt i ng er , 34 4 F . 3d 11 49 , 11 61 (11th C i r. 20 03 ). “ P rose cut ori al m i sc on du ct r e qui r e s ane w tr i a l onl y i f w e f i nd the r e m a rks ( 1) w e r e i m pr ope ra nd ( 2) pr e j udi c e d the de f

e nda nt ’ s s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. H e rna nde z , 145 F .3 d 1 4 3 3 , 1 4 3 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . T o b e s u b s ta n tia lly p rej u d i ci al , th e i m p ro p er co m m en t s m u sth av e “ so i n fect ed th e tri al w i th u n fai rn ess a s t o m a ke the r e s ul t i ng c onvi c t i on ors e nt e nc e ade ni a l of due pr oc e s s . ” P a rke rv. H e a d , 2 4 4 F .3 d 8 3 1 , 8 3 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ( a lte r a tio n a n d c ita tio n o m itte d ) .

“ W he n ac ur a t i ve i ns truc t i on ha s be e n gi ve n t o a ddr e s s s om e i m pr ope ra nd prej ud i ci al evi dence, w e w i l l re vers e onl y i f the evi dence ‘ i s s o h i gh l y pre j ud i ci al a s t o be i nc ur abl e by the tr i a l c ourt ’ s a dm oni t i on. ’ ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. H a rr i s t on, 329 F . 3d 77 9, 78 7 n . 4 (11 th C i r. 20 03 ) ( per c uri am ) ( ci t at i on s om i tt ed). F urther, w here th e a lle g e d e rr o r s r e p r e s e n t o n ly a n in s ig n if ic a n t p o rtio n o f

th e tr ia l, a n d p r o p e r ly ad m itted ev id en ce su ff

icien tl y e stab li sh es a d ef en d an t’ s g u il t, th e d ef

en d an t’ s11

s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s a r e nota f f e c t e d. S e e , e . g. , U ni t e d S t a t e s v. A da m s , 74 F . 3d 1093, 11 00 (11th C i r. 19 96 ). A s t o the spec i fi cs of T ho m as ’ ar gu m ent s, “ [i ] ti s abasi c c on st i tut i on al pr e c e pttha tr e ve r s i bl e e rr orw i l l e xi s ti n ac r i m i na l c a s e i f the pr os e c ut i on c om m e nt s on the f

a c ttha tthe de f

e nda ntdoe s nott e s t i f

y . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. L eQ ui re , 94 3 F . 2d 15 54 , 15 65 (11th C i r. 19 91 ). A com m enti s notan i m pe rm i s s i bl e r e f

e r e nc e , how e ve r , unl e s s ( 1) i tw a s “ i nt e nde d t o c om m e nton the de f e nda nt ’ s s i l e nc e or[ ( 2) ] w a s of s uc h ac ha r a c t e rtha taj ury w oul d na tur a l l y a nd n e c e s s a r ilyc o n s tru e it a s ac o m m e n t o n th e d e f e n d a n t's s ile n c e .” I d . A ddi t i ona l l y , “ i n r e c ogni z i ng the gove rnm e nt ’ s bur de n a nd obl i ga t i on of pr ovi ng g u il t b ey o n d a r ea so n ab le d o u b t, [w e h av e] re co g n ized th at a p ro se cu to r’s c om m e ntm a y be s o pr e j udi c i a l a s t o s hi f

tthe bur de n of

pr oof . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S i m on , 96 4 F . 2d 10 82 , 10 86 (11th C i r. 19 92 ). “ N everthel es s, [w e have] hel d that

‘ apr e j udi c i a l r e m a rk m a y be r e nde r e d ha rm l e s s by c ur a t i ve i ns truc t i ons t o the ju ry .’” I d . a t 1 0 8 7 ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . I n thi s c a s e , the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on by de ny i ng T h o m a s ’s m o tio n f

o rm is tr ia l a f

te rth e g o v e rn m e n t’s c o m m e n t d u r in g c lo s in g . F i rs t , the re cord supp ort s the court ’ s f i nd i ng thatthe go vernm ent ’ s c om m entw as no ti m prop er , bu tra ther s erved as are pl y t o the expl anat i on by T ho m as ’ s c ou nsel12

i n hi s ope ni ng s t a t e m e ntf orT hom a s ’ s pr e s e nc e i n C l e a rw a t e ron the ni ghtof the of f e ns e a nd w a s thus noti nt e nde d t o e m pha s i z e T hom a s ’ s s i l e nc e . S e c ond, the r e f e r e nc e w a s notof

s uc h ac ha r a c t e rtha tw oul d l e a d the j ury “ na tur a l l y a nd nece ss ar i l y” t o u nd er st and i tt o b e acom m enton T ho m as ’ s s i l ence . S ee L eQ ui re , 94 3 F . 2d at15 65 . F i nal l y, even i f the go vernm ent ’ s c om m enthad b ee n i m prop er an d co u ldb e v iew ed as an attem p t t o sh ift th e b u rd en o f p ro o f, th e d istrict co u rt’s i nstruct i on s t o the j ury s uffi ci ent l y c l ar i fi ed thatthe go vernm enthad the bu rden a nd tha tthe j ury c oul d notc ons i de rT hom a s ’ s s i l e nc e i n de c i di ng i f the g o v e rn m e n t p r o v e d its c a s e . I I I . CONCL US I ON T hom a s appe a l s hi s c onvi c t i ons f orbe i ng ac onvi c t e d f

e l on i n pos s e s s i on of am m un i t i on and an u nregi st er ed shot gu n o n the grou nd s thatthe go vernm entfa i l ed ( 1) t o pr ove tha the , e i the ra c tua l l y orc ons truc t i ve l y , pos s e s s e d the s hot gun a nd a m m u n itio n a n d ( 2 ) c o m m itte d p r o s e c u to r ia l m is c o n d u c t in th e c o u r s e o f its c l os i ng a r gum e nt s . W e f i nd tha tthe gove rnm e ntpr e s e nt e d s uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e f

or aj ury t o ha ve f

ound pos s e s s i on be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubta nd tha t , gi ve n the g o v ern m en t’ s a n d th e ju d g e’s s tatem en ts an d in stru ctio n s r eg ar d in g T h o m as ’s s ile n c e an d th e b u r d e n o f p r o o f , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in denyi ng the m ot i on for am i stri al . A cc ordi ng l y, w e AF F I RM .