United States v. Anthony Smith
670 F. App'x 208
| 5th Cir. | 2016Background
- Defendant Anthony Jerome Smith was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
- Smith lived and stayed overnight frequently at his occasional girlfriend Keisha Douglas’s home, kept personal items there, and received mail there.
- A firearm was found in plain view at Douglas’s home; officers found no direct evidence tying Douglas or her mother to the gun.
- Smith’s cell phones contained a photograph identified as the same gun and text messages in which Douglas said she found Smith’s gun, turned it over to police, and Smith reacted without disavowing ownership.
- Smith challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, arguing the government failed to prove he knowingly possessed the firearm; the challenge was preserved and reviewed de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove knowing possession | Government: circumstantial evidence (dominion of home, phone photo, texts) proves constructive possession and knowledge | Smith: no proof of ownership; others (e.g., Kevin Reeves) had access; photo alone insufficient | Affirmed — viewed in light most favorable to verdict, evidence supports constructive possession and knowledge |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Frye, 489 F.3d 201 (5th Cir. 2007) (standard for de novo review of preserved sufficiency challenge)
- United States v. Vargas-Ocampo, 747 F.3d 299 (5th Cir. 2014) (framework for constructive-possession sufficiency review)
- United States v. Terrell, 700 F.3d 755 (5th Cir. 2012) (inference of knowledge from access and connection to premises)
- United States v. McKnight, 953 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1992) (dominion or control can be exercised through another)
- United States v. Hinojosa, 349 F.3d 224 (5th Cir. 2003) (dominion/control over premises relevant to possession)
- United States v. De Leon, 170 F.3d 494 (5th Cir. 1999) (factors showing residence and control relevant to constructive possession)
- United States v. Ybarra, 70 F.3d 362 (5th Cir. 1995) (residency and presence support constructive possession)
- United States v. Meza, 701 F.3d 411 (5th Cir. 2012) (phone evidence and plain-view placement can support knowledge)
- United States v. Jones, 133 F.3d 358 (5th Cir. 1998) (ownership not required for constructive possession)
- United States v. Ramos-Garcia, 184 F.3d 463 (5th Cir. 1999) (appellate courts defer to jury credibility determinations)
- United States v. Anderson, 174 F.3d 515 (5th Cir. 1999) (conviction need not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence)