Court Opinion

ID: 9389319
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-25 16:01:02.570947+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:26.619363
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                              For the Eighth Circuit
                          ___________________________

                                  No. 22-2625
                          ___________________________

                              United States of America

                                         Plaintiff Appellee

                                           v.

                                  Jovell L. Swopes

                                       Defendant Appellant
                                    ____________

                      Appeal from United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
                                  ____________

                              Submitted: April 20, 2023
                                Filed: April 25, 2023
                                    [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Following a jury trial, Jovell Swopes appeals his conviction and sentence for
possessing a firearm as a felon. He argues that the district court1 erred in denying his

      1
      The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.
motion for a judgment of acquittal, and in calculating the applicable Guidelines range
at sentencing. Upon careful review, we affirm.

        While Swopes argues that there was insufficient evidence that he constructively
possessed the firearm found in the vehicle that he was driving, he was the sole
occupant of the vehicle, he was seen leaning toward the firearm, and a DNA analyst
testified that it was very likely that DNA found on the firearm came from him. We
conclude that this evidence is sufficient to uphold the conviction. See United States
v. McKee, 42 F.4th 910, 913 (8th Cir. 2022); United States v. Griffith, 786 F.3d 1098,
1103 (8th Cir. 2015); United States v. Chatmon, 742 F.3d 350, 352 (8th Cir. 2014).
Swopes also argues that the district court erred in calculating the applicable
Guidelines range based on a prior Missouri conviction for sale of a controlled
substance, but acknowledges that his argument is contrary to United States v.
Henderson, 11 F.4th 713, 718 (8th Cir. 2021). We are bound by that decision. See
Owsley v. Luebbers, 281 F.3d 687, 690 (8th Cir. 2002). In any event, the court
specifically explained that the sentence would have been the same regardless of the
Guidelines calculation. See United States v. Peterson, 887 F.3d 343, 349 (8th Cir.
2018).

      Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
                     ______________________________

                                         -2-