United States v. Nevils case brief summary
548 F.3d 802 (2008)
CASE FACTS
Police officers specializing in anti-gang enforcement were investigating unrelated criminal activity at an apartment complex in a high-crime area when they encountered defendant asleep on a couch in one of the apartments. The door of the apartment was off its hinges and leaning against the interior wall. Inside, the officers could see defendant asleep on a couch. Leaning against defendant's body were two firearms--one on his lap and another leaning against his leg. There was a coffee table approximately one foot from the couch. On the table were several items that the police later determined to be baggies full of marijuana and ecstasy, a cell phone, wrist watches, documents, and U.S. currency. The government did not offer any evidence that defendant's access to the apartment was exclusive.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court reversed defendant's conviction and remanded for a judgment of acquittal.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
548 F.3d 802 (2008)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant appealed a decision of the
United States District Court for the Central District of California,
which convicted him of being a felon in possession of firearms and
ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1).CASE FACTS
Police officers specializing in anti-gang enforcement were investigating unrelated criminal activity at an apartment complex in a high-crime area when they encountered defendant asleep on a couch in one of the apartments. The door of the apartment was off its hinges and leaning against the interior wall. Inside, the officers could see defendant asleep on a couch. Leaning against defendant's body were two firearms--one on his lap and another leaning against his leg. There was a coffee table approximately one foot from the couch. On the table were several items that the police later determined to be baggies full of marijuana and ecstasy, a cell phone, wrist watches, documents, and U.S. currency. The government did not offer any evidence that defendant's access to the apartment was exclusive.
DISCUSSION
- In reversing defendant's conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, the court held that the government did not produce evidence that would allow a rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was guarding the drugs or otherwise consciously in possession of the guns, as opposed to being passed out at the wrong place, at the wrong time.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed defendant's conviction and remanded for a judgment of acquittal.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment