United States v. Manor, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 1460

Manor, a convicted felon, was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition after a theater confrontation led to a chase and arrest.
Adrien identified Manor as the gunman who flashed a silver handgun at him in the Loews theater lobby.
Caisey tracked Manor from the theater, observed him on Tamworth Street, and later arrested him after a chase.
Linscott, an Emerson College security officer, also witnessed Manor with a stainless-steel gun during the Tamworth confrontation and helped arrest him.
A loaded stainless-steel gun was recovered underneath a car where Manor had sought cover, matching the gun Adrien described.
Manor was convicted at trial; he challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and alleged prosecutorial misconduct on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for possession	Manor argues the evidence fails to prove possession beyond a reasonable doubt.	Manor contends identities and inferences were improperly drawn from eyewitness testimony.	Evidence could rationally support guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Prosecutorial misconduct in closing	Manor claims closing misstatements improperly framed identification.	Manor asserts misstatements unfairly prejudiced the defense.	No reversible misconduct; no prejudice shown.

Guerra-Garcia, 336 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. 2003) (review standard for sufficiency)
Castro-Davis, 612 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2010) (credibility and standard of review for factual findings)
Gifford, 17 F.3d 462 (1st Cir. 1994) (judgment need not rule out alternate innocent hypotheses)
Ortiz, 447 F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2006) (reversal rarely occurs on sufficiency review)
Martinez-Medina, 279 F.3d 105 (1st Cir. 2002) (prosecutor's closing can argue inferences supported by record)
De La Paz-Rentas, 613 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2010) (misconduct requires prejudice; standard of review)
Henderson, 320 F.3d 92 (1st Cir. 2003) (prosecutors may argue reasonable inferences from evidence)