FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT Februar y 28, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ 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. 07- 11059 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 2 0 4 4 9 - CR- PCH 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 J O H N N Y E D W A R D K I N G , 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 S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 28, 2008) B efo re T JO F L A T , C A RN E S an d B A R K E T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:Count1 charg ed appe llant with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 1 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1), a

nd Count 2 with poss ession of a f irea rm in furtheranceof a dr

ugoffense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( c ). Th ejur y foun d h im n ot guilty

on bo th c ounts . 2 T he sol e i ss ue appel l antra i se s i n thi s app ea l i s w hether the evi dence w as s u f f ic ie n t to c o n v ic t o n C o u n t 3 o f a th r e e - c o u n t in d ic tm e n t, w h ic h c h a r g e d h im w i th pos s e s s i on of

a f i r e a r m a nd a m m uni t i on by a c onvi c t e d f e l on, i n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . §§ 92 2(g)(1), 92 4(e) . A ttr i a l , appe l l a ntm ove d the c our tf orj udgm e nt 1 of a c qui tt a l a tthe c l os e of the G ove rnm e nt ’ s c a s e i n c hi e f . A ddr e s s i ng C ount3, ap p e lla n t c o n te n d e d th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s in s u f f ic ie n t b e c a u s e n o r e a s o n a b le f a c t f i nde rc oul d f

i nd hi m gui l ty due t o the pol i c e of f i c e r s ’ c ontr a di c t or y t e s t i m ony r e ga r di ng the f

i r e a r m a nd i t s l oc a t i on. T he c our tove rrul e d hi s m ot i on, a nd he pr oc e e de d t o puton a de f e ns e , c a l l i ng one w i tne s s . A f t e rappe l l a ntr e s t e d a nd the G o v e rn m e n t d id lik e w is e , h e d id n o t r e n e w h is m o tio n f o rju d g m e n t o f

a c q u itta l. H e th e r e f

o r e f a ile d to p r e s e r v e h is o b

je c tio n th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s in s u f f ic ie n t to conv i cton C ou nt3. H ence , ou r r evi ew i s l i m i t ed t o the qu es t i on of w hether appel l ant ’ s c on vi ct i on w orked a m ani fe stm i sc arri age of j ust i ce . S ee U ni t ed S t at es v . S c h ie r , 4 3 8 F .3 d 1 1 0 4 , 1 1 0 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . T o o v e r tu rn th e C o u n t 3 c onvi c t i on, w e w oul d be r e qui r e d t o f i nd “ tha tthe e vi de nc e on a ke y e l e m e ntof the offe nse i s s o t enuo us thata c on vi ct i on w ou l d b e s ho cki ng . ” U ni t ed S t at es v. M i l ki nt a s , 470 F . 3d 1339, 1343 ( 11th C i r . 2006) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a r ks a nd3

c ita tio n s o m itte d ) . “I n m a k in g th is d e te r m in a tio n , w e m u s t v ie w th e e v id e n c e in the l i ghtm os tf

a vor a bl e t o the gove rnm e nta nd a c c e pta l l r e a s ona bl e i nf e r e nc e s a nd c r e di bi l i ty de t e r m i na t i ons tha ts uppor tthe j ur y ’ s ve r di c t . ” I d. T o est abl i sh the C ou nt3 o ff ense , the G ov ernm entw as re qu i re d t o p rove beyond a r ea sonabl e dou btthree el em ent s: (1) thatappel l anthad b ee n conv i ct ed of a cr i m e pun i shabl e by i m pri sonm entfor at erm exce edi ng on e y ea r; ( 2) tha the know i ngl y pos s e s s e d a f i r e a r m ; a nd ( 3) tha tthe f i r e a r m w a s i n or a f f e c t e d i nt e r s t a t e c om m e r c e . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. F unc he s , 135 F . 3d 1405, 1406- 07 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . A ss es si ng w i tness cr edi bi l i ty i s am att ercom m i tt ed sol el y t o the fa ct fi nd er , here the j ury. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. C al deron, 12 7 F . 3d 13 14 , 13 25 (11t h C i r. 1 9 9 7 ) , m o d if

ie d o n o th e rg r o u n d s b y U n ite d S ta te s v . T o le r , 1 4 4 1 4 2 3 , 1 4 2 7 ( 1 1 th C i r . 1998) . W he r e , a s he r e , the a r gum e nti s tha tthe j ur y ba s e d i t s c onvi c t i on on in c o n s is te n t a n d c o n tr a d ic to ry te s tim o n y o f g o v e rn m e n t w itn e s s e s , th e ap p e lla n t, to be ent i t l ed t o any re l i ef

, m ustshow thatthe t es t i m on y w as “ i ncre di bl e a s am att er o f la w .” C a ld e r o n , 1 2 7 F .3 d a t 1 3 2 5 . “F o rte s tim o n y o f a g o v e rn m e n t w itn e s s to be i ncre di bl e a s am att erof l aw , i tm ustbe ‘ un bel i evabl e on i t s f ac e. ’ ” U ni t ed S t a t e s v. R i ve r a , 775 F . 2d 1559, 1561 ( 11th C i r . 1985) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . P ut a nothe rw a y , the t e s t i m ony m us tr e l a t e t o “ f a c t s tha t[ the w i tne s s ] c oul d notha ve4

po ss i bl y observed o r e vent s thatcoul d n othave occurre d u nd erthe l aw s of nature. ” I d . ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a r k s a n d c ita tio n s o m itte d ) . T he prosecut i on es t abl i shed beyond a r ea sonabl e dou btthe fi rs tand t hi rd el em ent s of the C ou nt3 o ff ense throu gh the part i es ’ st i pu l at i on : (1) app el l anthad been conv i ct ed previ ou sl y of acr i m e pun i shabl e by i m pri sonm entfor at erm e xc e e di ng one y e a r , a nd ( 3) the S m i th & W e s s on the of f i c e r s s e i z e d, a s w e l l a s the a m m uni t i on f

orthe gun, tr a ve l e d i n a nd a f f e c t e d i nt e r s t a t e c om m e r c e . T he pr os e c ut i on s a t i s f

i e d the s e c ond e l e m e ntof the of f e ns e thr ough the t e s t i m ony of O ff i ce r H adl ey and D et ec t i ve H am m on d w ho sa i d thatappel l antw as i n actual po ss es si on of the S m i th & W es son as he e xi t ed the back do or of the re si dence i n an a tte m p t to f

le e a n d d r o p p e d th e g u n . E v e n th o u g h th e s e o f f ic e r s ap p e a r e d to cont ra di ctea ch ot her on cert ai n col l at er al m att er s, appel l anthas notshow n that thei r unequ i vo ca l and ent i re l y c on si st entt es t i m on y on the di sposi t i ve po i nt– that the y obs e r ve d hi m hol di ng a f i r e a r m i n hi s l e f

tha nd a s he e xi t e d the ba c k doorof the ho use – w as “ i ncre di bl e a s am att erof l aw ” or “ un bel i evabl e on i t s f ac e. ” I n sh o rt , h e h as n o td em o n strat ed th ath i s co n v i ct i o n am o u n t ed t o a m an i fest m is c a rr ia g e o f

ju s tic e . AF F I R ME D.