United States v. Nathaniel Benjamin
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5996
| 3rd Cir. | 2013Background
- Benjamin, on parole and living with his fiancée Esprit in Norristown, used alias James Burch to operate, with a suspended license.
- Parole officer arranged a search of Esprit’s home, leading to seizure of a gun, ammunition, drug paraphernalia, and a drug ledger near Benjamin’s belongings.
- Drugs were found in the basement: 6.62 grams of cocaine base and 326.93 grams of marijuana in ceiling joists near the back door.
- A notebook near Benjamin’s bed, glove findings, and a scale were introduced as evidence suggesting drug distribution rather than personal use.
- Esprit testified Benjamin helped purchase a handgun and that she hid the gun when parole officers arrived; he allegedly used an alias and engaged in gun-related activity at a range.
- Benjamin was convicted on counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, possession with intent to distribute marijuana, and two counts of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for house gun and drug charges | Benjamin: insufficient for the house gun and drug counts. | Government: sufficient to prove constructive possession and distribution. | Sufficient evidence supported the gun and drug convictions. |
| Whether the § 922(g)(1) gun convictions merge | Two § 922(g)(1) convictions for the same gun should merge. | Distinct offenses justified by constructive possession and interruptions. | District Court error; two convictions for the same gun must merge into one. |
| Plainness and impact of the sentencing error | Plain error affected substantial rights and fairness if left uncorrected. | Two concurrent sentences with a limited extra assessment; not impactful. | The error was plain, affected substantial rights, and justified relief. |
| Admission of parole status under Rule 404(b) | Parole status lacks proper probative purpose. | Parole status provided proper background and motive context. | Parole status properly admitted for background and context with limited prejudice. |
| Constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) | § 922(g)(1) unconstitutional on its face or as applied. | Precedent forecloses challenge; constitutionality upheld. | Foreclosed by Singletary; no further discussion necessary. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Brown, 3 F.3d 673 (3d Cir. 1993) (basis of sufficiency review in conspiracy and possession cases)
- United States v. Jenkins, 90 F.3d 814 (3d Cir. 1996) (constructive possession and proximity limits)
- United States v. Davis, 461 F.2d 1026 (3d Cir. 1972) (dominion and control may be shared; non-exclusive possession)
- United States v. Garth, 188 F.3d 99 (3d Cir. 1999) (constructive possession definitions and factors)
- United States v. Rivera, 77 F.3d 1348 (11th Cir. 1996) (continuing offense concept for § 922(g)(1))
- United States v. Horodner, 993 F.2d 191 (9th Cir. 1993) (continuity of possession and possession interruption doctrine)
- United States v. Ellis, 622 F.3d 784 (7th Cir. 2010) (continuing offense for § 922(g)(1) and reacquisition concept)
- United States v. Tann, 577 F.3d 533 (3d Cir. 2009) (plain error in multiplicity of § 922(g)(1) convictions)
- Ball v. United States, 470 U.S. 856 (1985) (scope of collateral consequences in reviewing improper convictions)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain error standard and corrective discretion)
- United States v. Singletary, 268 F.3d 196 (3d Cir. 2001) (foreclosure of facial challenges to § 922(g)(1))
- United States v. Vazquez, 271 F.3d 93 (3d Cir. 2001) (plain error standard framework and corrective action)