Opinion ID: 219327
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: In evaluating a sufficiency of the evidence claim, we ask “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found 1 Defendant had a base offense level of 24, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1,because he had two prior felony convictions for either a violent crime or a controlled substance offense. Two points were added because the offense involved three to seven firearms. See U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A). The 2008 edition of the Guidelines Manual was used. -4- the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979). Defendant claims the Government did not present sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he possessed the two firearms. To the contrary, the trial testimony supports the jury verdict. Cunningham testified that Cox stored the firearms at Defendant’s house and he also stated that Defendant told Cox not to sell the 9mm at such a low price. Less than one day after Cunningham had observed Cox place the firearms in an orange newspaper bag inside an air conditioner vent in Defendant’s house, the firearms were missing but the empty bag was in the same location. Clifton testified that Defendant told him to hold some guns for Defendant. Jackson testified that she was with Defendant and Stinson when they picked up the firearms at Clifton’s residence, and that Defendant asked Stinson to hold the firearms for Defendant. Cox admitted upon his arrest that he and Defendant hid the weapons at Clifton’s house. Cox also told this to a fellow inmate. Finally, Defendant himself told his cell mate that he hid the guns at Clifton’s residence. In short, there was ample evidence upon which the jury could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant knowingly possessed the two firearms, in violation of § 922(g).