Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 05-4742
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (CR-04-115-F)
Submitted:
Decided:
May 9, 2006
PER CURIAM:
Darrell Gerald Taylor was convicted after a jury trial of
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
He appeals, raising
I.
A defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence
faces a heavy burden.
cases
where
the
prosecutions
failure
is
clear.
United
In reviewing
80
(1942).
[S]ubstantial
evidence
is
evidence
that
- 2 -
one year; (2) the defendant knowingly possessed the firearm; and
(3) the possession was in or affecting commerce.
Langley, 62 F.3d 602, 606 (4th Cir. 1995).
that
there
was
insufficient
evidence
to
United States v.
that
his
prior
18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1).
district
court
instructed
the
jury,
without
In addition, in his
- 3 -
Id. at 246-47.
of
felony
possession
of
cocaine,
Taylors
prior
and his actions and body movements alerted the officers that he
might have a gun.
II.
To
obtain
new
trial
on
claim
of
prosecutorial
and
that
the
conduct
prejudicially
affected
his
United
Moreover,
fair
inferences
from
the
evidence.
United
States
v.
United States v.
that
statements
the
Governments
accurately
summarized
the
evidence.
Taylor also asserts that the Government erred by stating
that an officers recollection was recorded in police reports, even
though
the
reports
were
not
in
evidence.
Specifically,
the
- 5 -
This statement
that
impacted
statement
was
cross-examination.
the
testimony
really
In
any
at
trial.
The
on
defense
comment
event,
even
if
the
Governments
counsels
statement
was
III.
In general, the decision to give, or not to give, a jury
instruction, and the content of that instruction are reviewed for
an abuse of discretion.
(4th Cir. 1995).
foundation
to
support
the
instruction.
United
The denial of
the
requested
instruction
is
reversible
only
if
proposed
- 6 -
Id. at
Accordingly,
Specifically,
there was no crime scene unless Taylor possessed the gun. Absent
his possession, there was no crime at all which could be improperly
attributed to him by his presence.
- 7 -
IV.
Accordingly, we affirm Taylors conviction.
We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 8 -