Opinion ID: 1998693
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Prior Gun Possession

Text: Appellant contends that the court erred in ruling before trial that the government could elicit testimony from Mr. McCoy that he had seen appellant with a chrome-plated .380 [pistol] with a black handle a couple of weeks before the murder. At trial Mr. McCoy testified that at the crime scene he saw appellant holding a gun matching the same description. Appellant did not object to the testimony about appellant's prior possession of the gun, either when the government first announced its intention to present it or later when McCoy testified before the jury, so we review its admission only for plain error. We find no error whatsoever. Appellant seems to be contending that the testimony about appellant's prior gun possession was impermissible evidence of other crimes. In so contending, however, he misconstrues well-established case law. [A]n accused person's prior possession of the physical means of committing the crime is relevant and admissible because it offers some evidence of the probability of his guilt. Coleman v. United States, 379 A.2d 710, 712 (D.C.1977); accord, e.g., McConnaughey v. United States, 804 A.2d 334, 339 (D.C.2002); Jackson v. United States, 623 A.2d 571, 587 (D.C. 1993). Not only was the testimony admissible, but Mr. McCoy's description established the requisite link that the gun he saw earlier was the same gun used in the crime. See Stewart v. United States, 881 A.2d 1100, 1111-1112 (D.C.2005); McConnaughey, 804 A.2d at 338-339; King v. United States, 618 A.2d 727, 729-730 (D.C. 1993). Indeed, the challenged testimony in this case was more closely connected to appellant than evidence that we have held to be admissible in other cases. See, e.g., McConnaughey, 804 A.2d at 338-339 (testimony of prior sighting that occurred eleven months earlier was admissible); Johnson v. United States, 701 A.2d 1085, 1092 (D.C.1997) (photograph depicting gun used in crime admissible even though it was more than one year old); see also Morton v. United States, 87 U.S.App. D.C. 135, 136, 183 F.2d 844, 845 (1950) (testimony of two witnesses who saw a gun on the defendant's bed two weeks before the murder was admissible despite the absence of any proven connection between that gun and the murder weapon). We find no error by the trial court in admitting Mr. McCoy's testimony about the gun.