Opinion ID: 787155
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Firearm Offense.

Text: 12 The indictment charged Payne with being a felon in possession of two Jennings 9mm handguns, serial numbers 1405990 and 1405985. Payne stipulated to a prior felony conviction. At trial, the government presented the following evidence that he knowingly possessed the handguns. 13 In March 2001, investigators intercepted a series of phone calls from Eason to Payne in which they arranged a trip to Richmond, Virginia with Steven Lacy for the purpose of making a $100,000 down payment on contracts for the rights to hold rap concert after-parties. In the first call, Eason told Payne to bring the birthday present you had got for Rashad.... The one that you ain't never give to him. Payne apparently did not understand the reference, but when Eason again told Payne to bring the birthday gift in the next call, Payne said, All right. I read you loud and clear. In a third call, Eason said, you know, we do need two of them. 14 The St. Louis investigators believed that the $100,000 would be illegal drug proceeds. They alerted Kentucky law enforcement officials who stopped Eason's car for a traffic violation near Lexington, Kentucky. Eason was driving, Lacy was in the passenger seat, and Payne was in the back seat. A consent search uncovered the two brand new handguns and ammunition hidden in a secret compartment in the console between the two front seats. The police found over $100,000 in cash hidden in a rear cargo door panel. The three occupants were arrested for firearms violations. 15 Lacy testified that he wanted Eason's financial support for Lacy's entertainment business and therefore agreed to claim ownership of the guns and money and plead guilty to a misdemeanor firearm offense. Eason and Payne, as convicted felons, would have been guilty of felony offenses. Payne took part in one or more of the subsequent conversations in which Eason and Lacy discussed his pleading guilty to the firearm offense and helping Eason contest the government's notice that the $100,000 was subject to forfeiture. During Lacy's testimony, the government played a recorded phone call between Eason and Lacy in which Eason referred to the handguns as Air Force Ones. Lacy explained: Air Force Ones are tennis shoes, and he was saying that the guns were like Air Force Ones, if you get a pair of the new tennis shoes and they never been worn, they never touched the ground ... that's what the guns were like, they had never been used. 16 Payne argues that the government proved neither actual nor constructive possession of the handguns, only his presence as a passenger in Eason's car who had neither dominion nor control over either the vehicle or the console in which the guns were hidden. We have repeatedly stated that [m]ere presence as a passenger in a car from which the police recover contraband or weapons does not establish possession. United States v. Madkins, 994 F.2d 540, 541 (8th Cir.1993) (quotation omitted). The district court properly instructed the jury that [a] person may have actual possession or constructive possession. A person may have sole or joint possession.... If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is joint. See United States v. Wells, 721 F.2d 1160, 1162 (8th Cir.1983). Constructive possession may be proved by circumstantial evidence. See United States v. Garrett, 961 F.2d 743, 747 (8th Cir.1992). 17 Eason asked Payne in a phone call to bring two birthday presents on a long car trip during which they would be carrying $100,000 in cash. Eason and Payne were wary of electronic surveillance, so as convicted felons they would be unlikely to discuss firearms over the phone except in code. Lacy testified that Eason later referred to the handguns as Air Force Ones — brand new guns, like birthday presents. After their arrest, Payne helped Eason persuade Lacy to plead guilty to a misdemeanor firearm offense to deflect felony charges against Eason and Payne. From this evidence, a reasonable jury could find that Payne had actual possession of the handguns when he retrieved and delivered them to Eason for the purpose of protecting their cash. At a minimum, the close personal relationship between Payne and Eason and their joint undertakings provided sufficient evidence of constructive joint possession of the guns in the console. See United States v. Koskela, 86 F.3d 122, 127 (8th Cir.1996); Eason v. United States, 281 F.2d 818, 821 (9th Cir.1960).