Opinion ID: 150688
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: We review de novo a district court’s denial of a motion for judgment of 2 In Bonner v. Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc), we adopted as binding precedent the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to October 1, 1981. 6 acquittal on sufficiency of evidence grounds. United States v. Browne, 505 F.3d 1229, 1253 (11th Cir. 2007). In determining whether sufficient evidence supports a conviction, we “must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government and decide whether a reasonable fact finder could have reached a conclusion of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Herrera, 931 F.2d 761, 762 (11th Cir. 1991). Furthermore, a “jury’s verdict cannot be overturned if any reasonable construction of the evidence would have allowed the jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. Count One charged Facey with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), which criminalizes possession in or affecting commerce of a firearm or ammunition by a person who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5). Count Three charged Facey with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), which, in relevant part, makes it a crime for any person knowingly to possess a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A); see United States v. Brantley, 68 F.3d 1283, 1289 (11th Cir. 1995). Here, Facey only challenges whether the government presented sufficient evidence that he possessed the firearm at issue. “[A] conviction must rest upon firmer ground than the uncorroborated admission or confession of the accused.” Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 7 471, 488-89, 83 S. Ct. 407, 418 (1963). The Supreme Court, in considering the extent of corroborating evidence necessary to sustain a conviction based on an admission, has held that the corroborative evidence need not be sufficient, independent of the admission, to establish the entire corpus delicti, but instead only has to corroborate the credibility of the admission itself. Opper v. United States, 348 U.S. 84, 93, 75 S. Ct. 158, 164 (1954). Likewise, the Supreme Court has held that “[a]ll elements of the offense must be established by independent evidence or corroborated admissions, but one available mode of corroboration is for the independent evidence to bolster the confession itself and thereby prove the offense through the statements of the accused.” Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. 147, 156, 75 S. Ct. 194, 199 (1954) (quotation omitted). Therefore, when the government relies on an accused’s statement to support a conviction, independent evidence must corroborate the statement by establishing its “truth, trustworthiness and reliability.” United States v. Micieli, 594 F.2d 102, 109 (5th Cir. 1979). If independent evidence corroborates the statement in this way, the corroborated statement alone may prove the elements of the offense that are not proven by other evidence. Id. Here, independent evidence was introduced at trial to corroborate each statement involved in Facey’s admission, such that the admission itself may be 8 considered true, trustworthy, and reliable. See id. The corroborated admission and independent evidence are sufficient to establish that Facey possessed the .357 revolver involved in both Counts One and Three. We therefore hold that the district court did not err in denying Facey’s motion for judgment of acquittal as to Counts One and Three because, taken together, his corroborated admissions and independent evidence established that he possessed the firearm involved in both offenses. Based on our review of the record and consideration of the parties’ briefs, we affirm Facey’s convictions. AFFIRMED. 9