Opinion ID: 2982565
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sufficiency of the Evidence – Bank Robbery

Text: Weir also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his § 924(c) conviction in connection with the bank robbery. It is undisputed that during the course of the robbery, Weir never brandished a gun. But during his confession, Weir admitted that he carried a semi-automatic handgun in his jacket during the robbery. The government Case No. 13-5643 12 United States v. Weir also called witnesses who testified that Weir had access to such a handgun prior to the bank robbery. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have found that Weir possessed the handgun during the bank robbery. Weir argues that his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted because his § 924(c) conviction is based solely on his uncorroborated admission that he used a handgun during the bank robbery. Weir’s argument fails because there was independent evidence that bolstered Weir’s confession “and thereby prove[d] the offense ‘through’ the statements of the accused.” United States v. Brown, 617 F.3d 857, 863 (6th Cir. 2010) (citing Smith v. United States, 348 U.S. 147, 156 (1954)). Specifically, Samuel Carr, Weir’s roommate prior to the robbery, testified that Weir had access to Carr’s black .380 handgun prior to the offense. Another witness, Adeniyi Giwa, testified that he saw Weir in possession of a black .380 handgun in June of 2011. Such testimony bolstered Weir’s confession to provide sufficient corroboration for purposes of the corroboration rule. See United States v. Davis, 459 F.2d 167, 171 (6th Cir. 1972) (internal quotation marks omitted) (“[C]orroborative evidence does not have to prove the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, or even by a preponderance, as long as there is substantial independent evidence that the offense has been committed, and the evidence as a whole proves beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant is guilty.”) There was also independent corroborating evidence that Weir robbed the bank, which provides sufficient evidence to corroborate his confession. See Brown, 617 F.3d at 863 (“If, for example, a Case No. 13-5643 13 United States v. Weir defendant admits that he drove a car that had an illegal sawed-off shotgun in its trunk, it is sufficient for the independent corroborating evidence to show that he drove that particular car.”).