Opinion ID: 2994827
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Phillips’ Possession of a Firearm

Text: Phillips was convicted as a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(g)/8 and now argues there was insufficient evidence to show his possession of any of the firearms seized at the raid on 303 LaPorte Street when he was arrested. To obtain a conviction for felon-in-possession under sec. 922(g)(1), the government must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that
conviction, (2) the defendant possessed a firearm, and (3) the firearm had traveled in or affected interstate commerce. United States v. Walls, 225 F.3d 858, 864 (7th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). The only element at issue is Phillips’ possession of a firearm. Possession may be demonstrated by either actual or constructive possession. Id. (citation omitted). Actual possession may be shown by direct physical control of the firearm. Id. Constructive possession occurs when the defendant knowingly has the power and the intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over an object, either directly or through others. United States v. Garrett, 903 F.2d 1105, 1110 (7th Cir. 1990) (emphasis and citations omitted). In fact, the government presented sufficient evidence to show both actual and constructive possession of firearms located at 303 LaPorte. Phillips had direct control of the Taurus handgun found under the cushion next to him on the sofa. He had constructive possession of the other firearms in the sense that he had been observed at the house during the week of the raid and he was a higher- ranking member of Dawg Life at a Dawg Life crack house. Due to Phillips’ position in the gang, the jury could reasonably infer that he was in control at the crack house. At a minimum, the government need only show some nexus between the defendant and the guns. See United States v. Hunte, 196 F.3d 687, 692 (7th Cir. 1999) (a defendant’s access to a firearm, even when others also had access, was sufficient to allow a jury to find constructive possession. (citation omitted)). The district court’s jury instruction as to possession was proper, reading in part, Possession of an object is the ability to control it. Possession may exist even when a person is not in physical contact with the object, but knowingly has the power and intention to exercise direction or control over it, either directly or through others. There was sufficient evidence for the jury to convict Phillips on this charge.