Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark Charles LARKIN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-15
Citations: 231 F. App'x 345
Docket Number: No. 06-40759
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark Charles LARKIN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 231
Pages: 345–346

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark Charles LARKIN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-40759
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 15, 2007.
Joshua Thomas Burgess, U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Sherman, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Denise S. Benson, Assistant Federal Public Defender, U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Sherman, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Mark Charles Larkin was convicted by a jury and sentenced to a total of 78-months of imprisonment for possessing with the intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He now appeals.
Larkin argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence seized following the execution of a search warrant at his residence. As the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant was more than a "bare bones" affidavit, the officers who executed the warrant relied on it in good faith, and the evidence was admissible. See United States v. Satterwhite, 980 F.2d 317, 320-21 (5th Cir.1992). The district court did not err in denying Larkin's motion to suppress.
Larkin also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting both of his convictions. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we have determined that a rational trier of fact could have found that the evidence established Larkin's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as to both offenses. See United States v. McKnight, 953 F.2d 898, 901-03 & n. 3 (5th Cir.1992).
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.