United States v. Darius Fields, 977 F.3d 358

In May 2017 Darius Fields drove LaPorshya Polley to a federally licensed gun dealer; Polley purchased an FN 5.7 pistol after completing ATF Form 4473 certifying she was the actual buyer.
Fields entered the store separately, did not acknowledge knowing Polley, exchanged texts with her during the purchase (including “They only make the kind you told me not to get”), and left alone; Polley left with the gun in a bag.
In June 2017 police found Fields and Polley in a hotel room; the room was registered to Fields. Officers saw a box of ammunition on a desk (among Fields’s items) and a loaded FN 5.7 hidden in a bag in the room.
A second firearm (AK‑47 style pistol) was visible in a car the pair had used; Fields at first denied connection to the car, then admitted he had ridden in it and consented to a search.
A jury convicted Fields of (1) acquiring a firearm by false statement (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)) as an aider and abettor, (2) making a false record the dealer was required to keep (18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A)) as an aider and abettor, and (3) possession of firearms/ammunition as a convicted felon (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)).
The district court imposed 216 months’ imprisonment and orally pronounced several special conditions of supervised release, but the written judgment included an additional mental‑health treatment condition not orally pronounced.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for aiding/abetting straw purchase (Counts 1–2)	Govt: evidence (texts, driving Polley, staggered store entry/exit, salesman’s observations) supports that Fields willfully aided a straw purchase and induced false statements on Form 4473	Fields: no affirmative conduct shown; texts only show curiosity about Polley’s whereabouts	Affirmed: circumstantial evidence supported an inference Fields aided/abetted the straw purchase and false statements.
Sufficiency of evidence for § 922(g)(1) possession by a felon (Count 3)	Govt: Fields had constructive possession — hotel room registered to him, ammo in plain view, pistol hidden in room; car control and pistol in plain view support possession of second gun	Fields: joint occupancy; no fingerprints/DNA; car not his; clothes near gun were women’s	Affirmed: jury could reasonably infer constructive possession of the ammunition and FN 5.7 and also the car weapon; joint‑occupancy indicators sufficient.
Inclusion of unpronounced special condition in written judgment	Govt: (concedes) written condition was not orally pronounced and thus should be stricken	Fields: lacked opportunity to object to special condition; it was omitted at sentencing and in PSR	Judgment affirmed as to convictions; sentence vacated in part and remanded to remove unpronounced mental‑health condition from written judgment.

United States v. Ortiz-Loya, 777 F.2d 973 (5th Cir. 1985) (defines aiding and abetting and § 922(a)(6) false‑statement principles)
United States v. Soto, 539 F.3d 191 (3d Cir. 2008) (straw‑purchase liability need not require detailed knowledge of which Form 4473 entries would be false)
United States v. Shorty, 741 F.3d 961 (9th Cir. 2013) (aiding a straw purchaser by encouraging representation as the actual buyer supports § 924(a)(1)(A) liability)
United States v. Talbert, 501 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2007) (simultaneous possession of multiple firearms treated as a single § 922(g)(1) offense; unanimity requirement explained)
United States v. Munoz, 150 F.3d 401 (5th Cir. 1998) (distinguishes actual and constructive possession definitions)
United States v. McKnight, 953 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1992) (contraband in plain view within an area controlled by defendant supports constructive possession)
United States v. Colwell, 764 F.2d 1070 (5th Cir. 1985) (aiding and abetting requires some affirmative conduct and shared criminal intent)
United States v. Rivas-Estrada, 906 F.3d 346 (5th Cir. 2018) (unpronounced special conditions must be stricken from the written judgment)