Opinion ID: 6215959
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: At trial, Obi stipulated to two elements of a § 922(g)(1) offense -- a prior conviction for a crime punishable by imprisonment exceeding one year, and knowledge he is in a class of persons therefore barred from possessing a firearm or ammunition. See United States v. Coleman, 961 F.3d 1024, 1027 (8th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 2819 (2021). To prove the remaining element at issue on appeal -- that Obi knowingly possessed ammunition -- the government presented evidence (i) that Obi was the shooter, and (ii) that the shell casings found on the street near the victims’ car established that the shooter possessed ammunition. See United States v. Weaver, 558 F. App’x 727, 728 (8th Cir. 2014) (“sufficient evidence supported a felon-in-possession-of-ammunition conviction where the firearm defendant used was never located, but police found defendant’s spent cartridges at the scene of the shooting,” citing United States v. Miner, 108 F.3d 967, 969 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 904 (1997)). Obi argues the government’s evidence was insufficient to meet its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, viewing the evidence and the jury’s credibility determinations in the light most favorable to its verdict and reversing only if no reasonable jury could have found Obi guilty. United States v. Ganter, 3 F.4th 1002, 1004 (8th Cir. 2021). 1 The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2- At trial, each of the four victims testified to the shooting and the events leading up to the shooting. Williams, Kinard, and McCranie picked up Bogan and drove to a store in Williams’s car to purchase milk for Bogan’s infant. Returning, they saw Obi, the father of Bogan’s child, on the porch. In the midst of a dispute with Obi, Bogan told Williams to keep driving. Circling the block, Williams saw Obi approach the car, reach under his shirt, and pull out a firearm. Williams attempted to drive away. Obi fired several shots at the driver’s side of the car. One bullet came through the driver’s window, barely missing Williams, and ricocheted around the cabin before coming to rest on the passenger side front door. All four eyewitness victims testified that Obi was the shooter. Each was throughly cross-examined by defense counsel regarding the events of the evening, how much they could see from inside the vehicle, and why they were able to identify Obi as the shooter. Bogan, who had told law enforcement some forty times that Obi shot at the vehicle, was reluctant to testify against the father of her child and admitted on cross exam that she might have made a mistake. But on redirect, she unequivocally stated, “It was Anthony.” Regarding the ammunition, crime-scene specialist Meagan Buchert testified that she found five .45-caliber shell casings at the scene of the shooting. One was standing up and none were run over or damaged, indicating no heavy traffic before their discovery. Buchert also testified that the bullet recovered inside Williams’s car appeared to be a .45-caliber round, like the casings found in the street, and that no other casings were found at the scene of the shooting. Detective Todd Davis testified there was an apparent bullet strike to the driver’s side window when he arrived at the scene and interviewed the victims. On appeal, Obi argues the evidence he possessed ammunition was insufficient. There was no DNA or fingerprint evidence on the shell casings, the firearm used in the shooting was never recovered, and the victims’ testimony did not preclude that the casings were already in the street before the shooting. Therefore, “the jury had to resort to speculation and conjecture.” We disagree. Viewing the trial evidence in the -3- light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, as we must, a reasonable jury could find from the victims’ testimony that Obi was the shooter; and from the physical evidence, the victims’ testimony, and the testimony of expert Buchert and Detective Davis that the shell casings were discharged from the shooter’s firearm and therefore had been ammunition knowingly in the shooter’s possession. “[P]roof that a defendant possessed a firearm may be established solely by eyewitness testimony where the gun is not recovered or introduced at trial.” United States v. Anderson, 78 F.3d 420, 423 (8th Cir. 1996). The same principle applies in a felon-in-possession-of-ammunition prosecution. See United States v. Kelly, 436 F.3d 992, 996 (8th Cir. 2006). The district court did not err in denying Obi’s post-verdict motion for judgment of acquittal or a new trial based on insufficiency of the evidence.