Opinion ID: 4566349
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: We briefly review the trial evidence in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, accepting all inferences in favor of the government. United States v. Hernandez, 569 F.3d 893, 896 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review), cert. denied, 559 U.S. 915 (2010). Des Moines police executed a warrant to search a residence where they had probable cause to suspect marijuana distribution, and where a gold GMC Yukon registered to Jefferson had been seen. Jefferson, his girlfriend, Wendy Stark, and their infant child were in the home. In the bedroom, officers found a loaded .22caliber handgun on a night stand; eighty grams of loose and baggied marijuana in two mason jars and in a blue tote; plastic sandwich bags; and digital scales. Each baggie contained 3.5 grams of marijuana, a quantity commonly used for individual sales. Officers also found articles of male clothing, letters addressed to Jefferson, and a pay stub for Jefferson. In another room called the “smoke room,” they found 270 grams of marijuana, plastic sandwich bags, .22-caliber ammunition, .40-caliber ammunition, a digital scale, and an empty box for the .22-caliber handgun. The government introduced photographs of the rooms and their contents as the officers found them. Called as a witness by the government, Wendy Stark testified that Jefferson obtained four to six pounds of marijuana from a cousin each month. Jefferson taught her to package the marijuana in plastic sandwich bags for resale, providing the weight 1 The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. -2- for each package and setting the price. Stark delivered marijuana to Jefferson’s customers in a designated parking lot and at the home, occasionally selling to her coworkers. Jefferson used a bank account in Stark’s name to deposit proceeds and to withdraw funds for monthly purchases. The government introduced text messages that corroborated this testimony, directing Stark to prepare or deliver packages, check on the drug supply, charge a certain price, or withdraw money. Stark testified that Jefferson kept most of the drug supply in the smoke room. He instructed Stark to install a lock on the door to which only she and Jefferson had a key. She purchased the .22-caliber handgun at Jefferson’s behest for protection at home. For personal protection, Jefferson carried a .40-caliber firearm while conducting drug transactions. On the morning after Jefferson was robbed of the .40caliber firearm, he texted, “I got robbed!! I need you to get 45 shells and 9 and .380.” Stark complied that morning. Jefferson subsequently took the .22-caliber handgun found on the night stand with him when distributing. Stark testified that Jefferson carried the .22-caliber firearm while conducting drug transactions the night before the warrant search; he laid it on the night stand and fell asleep when he returned home. Stark regularly acquired ammunition for Jefferson including the .22- and .40-caliber bullets found in the smoke room. Although she never saw a .45-caliber, a 9- millimeter, or a .380-caliber firearm at the home, Jefferson displayed various guns in their bedroom. Text messages confirmed that Stark purchased bullets for Jefferson for guns not found in their home. Jefferson argues the evidence was insufficient to convict him of Count 2 -- marijuana distribution. The government’s case was based on Stark’s testimony, he argues, and it “should be given no weight” because she was a drug user with prior drug convictions who admitted to testifying to receive a lenient sentence in future proceedings and to improve her chance of gaining custody of her children. We reject this argument for multiple reasons. First, the drugs, drug paraphernalia, gun, and ammunition found in a home where Jefferson slept, kept clothes, received mail, and -3- registered his car corroborated Stark’s testimony and provided independent evidence Jefferson possessed and distributed marijuana. See United States v. Thompson, 881 F.3d 629, 632-33 (8th Cir. 2018). Second, even without this corroborating evidence, “[w]e have repeatedly upheld jury verdicts based solely on the testimony of coconspirators and cooperating witnesses.” United States v. Anwar, 880 F.3d 958, 967 (8th Cir. 2018) (quotation omitted). Third, it is axiomatic that “witness credibility is virtually unreviewable on appeal because it is preeminently the job of the finder of fact.” United States v. Van, 543 F.3d 963, 965 (8th Cir. 2008) (quotation omitted). The jury rejected Jefferson’s argument it should find Stark not credible for the reasons he now urges us to adopt on appeal. We will not second-guess the jury’s credibility finding. Jefferson argues the evidence was insufficient to convict him of Counts 5 and 6, the firearm counts, because Stark’s testimony that he possessed the .22-caliber handgun found on the night stand was not credible, there is no fingerprint or other tangible evidence that he possessed the firearm or ammunition, and Stark’s testimony is not sufficient to support the jury’s finding that he possessed the .22-caliber ammunition. We disagree. Stark -- whose credibility we must accept -- testified that Jefferson started carrying the .22-caliber handgun during drug transactions after his .40-caliber firearm was stolen, carried that firearm the night before the warrant search, and placed it on the night stand where it was found. Ammunition for the two firearms was found in the smoke room. A reasonable jury could find that Jefferson possessed the .22-caliber firearm and the ammunition in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. See United States v. Waln, 916 F.3d 1113, 1116 (8th Cir. 2019). Whether Stark initially purchased these items is irrelevant. Stark’s testimony established, at a minimum, that Jefferson had actual and constructive joint possession of the .22-caliber firearm and the ammunition. See United States v. Williams, 512 F.3d 1040, 1044 (8th Cir.), cert. denied. 553 U.S. 1099 (2008). “[F]orensic evidence is not necessary for a firearms conviction.” United States v. Porter, 687 F.3d 918, 921 (8th Cir. 2012) (quotation omitted). -4-