Opinion ID: 2812060
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Prior Firearm Conviction

Text: Defendant Johnson argues that the district court erred in denying his motion in limine and admitting into evidence his 2003 Florida conviction—for possession of a firearm, a shotgun, by a convicted felon—because it was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial.2 2 We review a district court’s denial of a motion in limine for abuse of discretion. United States v. Thompson, 25 F.3d 1558, 1563 (11th Cir. 1994). We also review for abuse of 8 Case: 14-14302 Date Filed: 06/25/2015 Page: 9 of 11 Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), evidence of “a crime, wrong, or other act” is not admissible to prove “a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.” Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(1). Such evidence “may be admissible for another purpose,” however, such as to prove a defendant’s motive, intent, knowledge, or absence of mistake. Id. 404(b)(2). To be admissible, the Rule 404(b) evidence must (1) be relevant to an issue other than the defendant’s character, (2) be sufficiently proven to allow a jury to find that the defendant committed the extrinsic act, and (3) possess probative value that is not substantially outweighed by its undue prejudice under Federal Rule of Evidence 403. United States v. Sanders, 668 F.3d 1298, 1314 (11th Cir. 2012). Rule 404(b) is a rule of inclusion that “allows extrinsic evidence unless it tends to prove only criminal propensity.” Id. With regard to the first prong, a convicted felon’s knowing possession of a firearm at a previous time is relevant to whether his possession of a firearm at a later time is knowing rather than mistaken or accidental. United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273, 1281 (11th Cir. 2003). With regard to the third prong, to determine whether the probative value of the prior firearm offense is substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect, a district court must make “a common sense assessment of all the circumstances surrounding the extrinsic offense, including prosecutorial discretion a district court’s decision to admit or exclude evidence. United States v. Smith, 122 F.3d 1355, 1357 (11th Cir. 1997). 9 Case: 14-14302 Date Filed: 06/25/2015 Page: 10 of 11 need, overall similarity between the extrinsic act and the charged offense, as well as temporal remoteness.” Id. at 1282 (quotation marks omitted). Even if a district court erroneously admitted evidence under Rule 404(b), we may still affirm if the error was harmless. United States v. Hubert, 138 F.3d 912, 914 (11th Cir. 1998); see also Fed. R. Evid. 103(a); Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(a). Evidence admitted in violation of Rule 404(b) is harmless where there is substantial evidence of the defendant’s guilt. United States v. Chavez, 204 F.3d 1305, 1317 (11th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Harriston, 329 F.3d 779, 789 (11th Cir. 2003) (stating that the admission of a prior conviction is harmless “where there is overwhelming evidence of guilt”). Here, Defendant Johnson did not show the district court abused its discretion in admitting his 2003 Florida conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. That conviction was highly probative of Defendant Johnson’s knowing possession given the close similarity between the two offenses. See United States v. Zapata, 139 F.3d 1355, 1357-58 (11th Cir. 1998). Furthermore, any prejudice resulting from the admission of the prior conviction was mitigated by the district court’s limiting instruction to the jury that they could not use the evidence of Defendant Johnson’s prior conviction to decide whether Johnson actually possessed the firearm and the ammunition in the current case. See United States v. Edouard, 485 F.3d 1324, 1346 (11th Cir. 2007). 10 Case: 14-14302 Date Filed: 06/25/2015 Page: 11 of 11 In any event, we readily conclude that any error in admitting the prior conviction was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of Defendant Johnson’s guilt in the form of eyewitness testimony, corroborated by physical evidence and a 911 call, the police testimony, and Johnson’s confession during his interview with Agent Carrier. AFFIRMED. 11