United States v. Greer, 631 F.3d 608

Greer, a convicted felon, was charged with firearm and ammunition possession in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
An informant, Stubbs, agreed to assist in investigations in exchange for a plea bargain; he proposed robbing a house to obtain a gun.
Surveillance showed Greer driving a blue Hyundai Sonata; the car was rented and linked to Greer via pay stubs, receipts, and a rental agreement in a Tangela Hudson's name.
A Glock pistol, ammunition, car keys, and other items were found in Greer’s vicinity, including a ammunition magazine matching the gun in the Sonata trash area and car-related documents in Greer's name.
Detective Janus observed a tattoo on Greer’s left arm reading 'Tangela' after Greer’s arrest, which the government later relied on to connect Greer to the car and ammunition.
Greer was convicted by a jury on one count of possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon; the district court sentenced him to 120 months (plus a concurrent 18-month term).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the tattoo evidence violated the Fifth Amendment	Greer (Plaintiff) contends tattoo content was testimonial and incriminating.	Greer argues tattoo content was compelled by government.	Tattoo content was testimonial but not compelled; no Fifth Amendment violation.
Sufficiency of the evidence for possession	Greer argues evidence fails to prove constructive possession.	Greer asserts insufficient causal link to control the firearm and ammunition.	Evidence viewed in the Government’s favor supports constructive possession beyond a reasonable doubt.
Admission of uncharged-crime evidence	Greer challenges prejudice from testimony about the planned robbery with Stubbs.	Greer claims unfair prejudice and lack of relevance.	District court acted within discretion; evidence admissible for motive/intent/plan; harmless error.

United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (U.S. 2000) (test for testimonial self-incrimination evidence)
Doe v. United States, 487 U.S. 201 (U.S. 1988) (testimonial nature of communications depends on content)
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 177 (U.S. 2004) (testimony and disclosures that could be used in prosecution)
Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (U.S. 1967) (distinguishing physical characteristics from compelled testimonial writing)
Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (U.S. 1976) (voluntary production of incriminating papers not compelled)
United States v. Gaines, 295 F.3d 293 (2d Cir. 2002) (constructive possession and inference standards)
United States v. Kaiser, 609 F.3d 556 (2d Cir. 2010) (Rule 404(b) inclusionary analysis for other-acts evidence)
United States v. Carboni, 204 F.3d 39 (2d Cir. 2000) (probative value vs. prejudice under Rule 403)
United States v. Birney, 686 F.2d 102 (2d Cir. 1982) (broad discretion in admitting 404(b) evidence)
United States v. Rea, 958 F.2d 1206 (2d Cir. 1992) (harmless error standard for evidentiary abuse)