[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 16 13 0 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 1- cr-2 00 22 -UU-2

UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Plai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, vers us GILBERTO GARCIA, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll D efen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Sep te m be r 5, 2 01 2) Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, HULL andMARTIN, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:

Case: 11-16130 Date Filed: 09/05/2012 Page: 1 of 4App el la ntGil be rto Garci a ap pe al s h is co nv ic ti on forpo ss es si on of afir earm

in furth eran ce o f a dru g- tra ffi ck in g c rime, in v io la ti on of 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( c)(1 )(A). Garci a arg ue s t ha t the re was in su ffi ci en t ev id en ce t o p ro ve th athi s fi rearm po ss es si on was “ in furth eran ce o f” the dru g- tra ffi ck in g c rime. The fact s ad du ced atth e b en ch tri al on th is co un t s ho wedth atGarci a dro ve to Flo rid a wit h aful ly lo ad ed , sem i-aut om at ic fir earm in th e fro ntco ns ol e o f th e tr uc k, kno win g t ha t h e wou ldne go ti at e a co cai ne de al . Garci a ag reedto dri ve anun de rco ve r ve hi cl e co nt ai ni ng th e co cai ne to a st or ag e lo cat io n, an d i nt en de d fo r hi s co de fen da ntto fo ll ow h im

in th e truc k wi th th e fi rearm . Su ffi ci en cy

of the ev id en ce i s que st io n o f la w subjec t t o de no vo rev ie w. Uni te d Sta tes v. Ma rt in ez , 83 F.3d37 1, 3 73 -7 4 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 6) . Whi le ord in ari ly a p art y m us t m ov e fo r a jud gm en t o f acqui tt al at t ria l i n o rd er t o p res erv e a su ffi ci en cy

of t he ev id en ce ar gu m en t o n app eal , itis no t n eces sa ry to do so in a be nc h tria l. Uni te d Sta tes v. Hu rn , 36 8 F .3d13 59 , 13 68 n.5 (11 thCir . 20 04 ). In as se ss in g s uf

fic ie nc y , we rev ie w th e ev id en ce “ in th e li gh t m os t favo rab le to th e go ve rn m en t, wi th all reas on ab le in fere nc es an d c red ib il it y ch oi ces m ad e in th e go ve rn m en t’s fa vo r.” Mar ti ne z , 83 F.3dat 3 74 . A con vi ct io n wi ll no t b e rev ers ed un le ss “ no reas on ab le tri er o f fac t co ul d fi ndgu il t b ey on d areas on ab le do ub t.” 2 Case: 11-16130 Date Filed: 09/05/2012 Page: 2 of 4Uni te d Sta tes v. S ch al te nb ra nd , 93 0 F .2d15 54 , 15 60 (11 th Cir . 19 91 ). Sect io n 9 24 (c) o f Tit le 18 of t he U.S. Cod e st at es , “ an y pe rs on who , du rin g an d i n re la ti on to an y

cri m e o f vi ol en ce o r drug tra ffi ck in g c rime . . . us es or carr ie s a f ire arm , or wh o, i n fu rth eran ce o f an y su ch cri m e, po ss es se s a f ire arm , sh al l, i n a dd it io n t o t he pu ni sh m en t p ro vi de d fo r su ch cri m e o f vi ol en ce o r dr ug tra ffi ck in g c rime” be s ub

ject t o a dd it io na l p en al ti es enum erat edin th e st atut e. 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (c)( 1) (A). W e h av e in te rp ret ed“ in furth eran ce o f” t o m ean th atth e fir earm “ he lp ed , furth ered , pro m ot ed , or a dv an cedth e dru g t raff ic ki ng .” Uni te d St at es v. Timmo ns , 28 3 F .3d12 46 , 12 52 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ). Mere pre se nc e o f a fir earm in th e d efen da nt ’s “ do m in io n a ndco nt ro l” du rin g t he dru g o ffen se is in su ffi ci en t b y

it se lf t o c on st itut e p os se ss io n “ in furth eran ce o f” the drug -tr affi ck in g c rime. Id . at 1 25 3. We con si de r a l is t o f no n- ex cl us iv e fac to rs in de te rm in in g wh ethe r th ere i s “ so m e n ex us be twee n t he gu n a ndth e dru g s el li ng op erat io n” : (1 ) th e type o f drug act iv it y be in g c on du ct ed ; (2 ) acc es si bi li ty of th e fir earm ; (3 ) th e type o f th e weap on ; (4 ) whe th er the weap on is st ol en ; (5 ) th e st atus of t he po ss es si on (le gi ti m at e o r il le ga l); (6) whet he r th e g un is lo ad ed ; (7 ) pr ox im ity to th e dru gs or dru g p ro fit s; an d (8 ) th e ti m e an d c irc um st an ces un de r whi chth e g un is fou nd . Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . To p ro ve th e § 92 4( c) o ffen se as c ha rg edin Co un t 3 , th e g ov ern m en t m us t 3 Case: 11-16130 Date Filed: 09/05/2012 Page: 3 of 4es tabl is h t ha t Gar ci a (1 ) kn owi ng ly, (2 ) po ss es se d afir earm , (3) in furth eran ce o f a

drug -tr affi ck in g c rime. Uni te d Sta tes v. Woo da rd , 53 1 F .3d13 52 , 13 62 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ). W e h av e n otrequi redth atth e dru gs an d fi rearm be lo cat edin th e sa m e co m pa rtment. Se e Uni te d Sta tes v. S ua re z , 31 3 F .3d12 87 , 12 92 -9 3 (1 1th C ir. 20 02 ) (uph ol di ng a co nv ic ti on wher e o ffi cers reco ve redlo ad edfir earm s an d amm un it io n t ha t was lo os e ina ba g i n t he m as te r be dr oo m clo se t i n t he de fen da nt ’s res id en ce b ecau se th e res id en ce h adbe enus edto st or e co cai ne ). Viewe d i n t he li gh t m os t fa vo rab le to th e g ov ern m en t, we co nc lu de fro m th e reco rdth atth e ev id en ce es tabl is he d ane xu s b etween th e fi rearm an d t he dru g co ns pi racy to s ho w th atth e fi rearm was p os se ss ed“ in furth eran ce” o f a dru gtra ffi ck in g c rime andwas s uf fic ie ntto supp ort Gar ci a’s § 9 24 (c) c on vi ct io n. Thu s, we af

firm Garci a’s co nv ic ti on . AFFIRMED.

4 Case: 11-16130 Date Filed: 09/05/2012 Page: 4 of 4