United States v. Leroy Shumaker, 866 F.3d 956

On May 7, 2015, police investigating a stolen rain-gutter machine went to Leroy Shumaker’s residence, found and seized the stolen item from a trailer, and later obtained a search warrant for the residence.
Officers surveilled the residence while Shumaker was interviewed at the station; when they executed the warrant, they entered through a window and found ~28.84 grams of methamphetamine, packaging materials, scales, drug ledgers, and $1,214 in cash; a mail bill addressed to Shumaker was found in the living room.
Shumaker was indicted for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine (21 U.S.C. § 841), pleaded not guilty, and proceeded to trial; the jury returned a guilty verdict after ~6.5 hours.
Key trial evidence: testimony that the baggies and paraphernalia indicated distribution; cooperating witness Troy Rickard testified he bought methamphetamine from Shumaker multiple times and identified the exact kitchen cabinet location where drugs were kept.
Post-trial Shumaker submitted utility bills and a landlord affidavit suggesting he did not occupy the residence until Feb–Apr 2015 and moved for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence; he also challenged sufficiency of the evidence via judgment of acquittal.
The district court denied acquittal and a new-trial motion (sustaining only an obstruction-of-justice objection), sentenced Shumaker to 121 months, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to convict for possession with intent to distribute	Shumaker: evidence was insufficient; drugs belonged to supplier Gonzalez or others; officers lacked proof he possessed or controlled the drugs	Government: drugs and distribution paraphernalia were found in sole-occupant residence; witness Rickard tied purchases and storage location to Shumaker; surveillance showed no one entered/left	Affirmed — viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
New trial based on newly discovered evidence (utility bills, landlord affidavit)	Shumaker: new documents show he did not occupy the residence during the time Rickard testified, so evidence undermines Rickard and would likely produce acquittal	Government: the new evidence at best impeaches timing; it does not contradict Rickard’s key testimony about where drugs were stored, nor would it likely produce acquittal	Affirmed — district court did not abuse discretion; new evidence was not material and was largely impeaching

United States v. Augustine, 663 F.3d 367 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
United States v. Goodyke, 639 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2011) (any rational trier of fact standard)
United States v. Aldridge, 664 F.3d 705 (8th Cir. 2011) (jurors’ credibility determinations are virtually unreviewable)
United States v. Baker, 479 F.3d 574 (8th Cir. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion review for new-trial denials)
United States v. Bell, 761 F.3d 900 (8th Cir. 2014) (rigorous standard and five-factor test for new trial based on newly discovered evidence)