United States v. Samuel Curry, Jr.
679 F. App'x 781
11th Cir.2017Background
- Curry, a convicted felon, was tried and convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) for possessing a firearm found wedged in Officer Kelley’s patrol-car backseat during a traffic stop.
- Officers Kelley and Roberson testified they checked Kelley’s backseat earlier, placed Curry (unhandcuffed, per Kelley) in Kelley’s backseat after a brief Terry frisk, and that Roberson discovered the gun as he approached to place Smith in the car. Photographs of the backseat were admitted.
- Defense witnesses (Curry and passenger Smith) testified they were thoroughly frisked, handcuffed, sat in Kelley’s patrol car for several minutes, and that no firearm was observed until later; no usable fingerprints were found on the gun.
- At sentencing the PSR reported officers found a bag with white powder (Curry admitted possession of the substance but denied it was a drug); a later lab report showed a trace of cocaine.
- District court applied a four-level USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement (firearm connected to another felony—drug possession) and a two-level § 3C1.1 obstruction enhancement for willfully false testimony; Curry was sentenced to 84 months.
- On appeal, Curry challenged (1) sufficiency of the evidence for constructive possession, (2) clear error in applying the § 2K2.1(b)(6) enhancement based on PSR/lab evidence, and (3) clear error in applying the § 3C1.1 obstruction enhancement for his trial testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession of firearm | Curry: no proof he possessed the gun; proximity and conflicting testimony insufficient | Government: officer testimony, routine backseat checks, and timing supported inference Curry had the gun on his person | Affirmed — evidence sufficient; jury entitled to credit officers and infer prior possession |
| § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement (firearm in connection with another felony) | Curry: enhancement improperly based on PSR facts not proved at trial and govt agreed not to pursue white powder at trial; insufficient proof drug was cocaine | Government: PSR admission, Curry’s acknowledgment the substance was his, and sentencing lab report showing trace cocaine established nexus by preponderance | Affirmed — district court not clearly erroneous; may consider sentencing evidence and PSR; preponderance standard met |
| § 3C1.1 obstruction enhancement for perjury/false testimony | Curry: jury’s rejection of his testimony is not enough for obstruction; court erred in finding willful falsehood | Government: district court heard testimony, found lack of credibility and willful falsehood; specific findings not required if general finding supported | Affirmed — district court’s credibility finding deferred to; sufficient evidence of willful material falsehood |
| Use of evidence at sentencing contrary to trial agreement | Curry: government’s limited agreement at trial precluded use of white powder evidence at sentencing | Government: agreement limited to case-in-chief; sentencing may consider other relevant information | Affirmed — sentencing may consider evidence outside trial case-in-chief; no breach preventing consideration |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jiminez, 564 F.3d 1280 (11th Cir.) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- United States v. Farley, 607 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir.) (accept jury inferences and credibility determinations)
- United States v. Wright, 392 F.3d 1269 (11th Cir.) (possession can be actual or constructive; proof methods)
- United States v. Rackley, 742 F.2d 1266 (11th Cir.) (mere proximity insufficient for possession)
- United States v. Whitfield, 50 F.3d 947 (11th Cir.) (standard for reviewing § 2K2.1(b)(6) factual findings)
- United States v. Dimitrovski, 782 F.3d 622 (11th Cir.) (clear error and government burden at sentencing)
- United States v. Onofre–Segarra, 126 F.3d 1308 (11th Cir.) (sentencing courts may consider all relevant information)
- United States v. Wilson, 884 F.2d 1355 (11th Cir.) (types of evidence available at sentencing)
- United States v. Bagwell, 30 F.3d 1454 (11th Cir.) (review standard for obstruction findings)
- United States v. Banks, 347 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir.) (deference to district court credibility determinations)
- United States v. Moran, 778 F.3d 942 (11th Cir.) (definition and proof of perjury for § 3C1.1)
- United States v. Jones, 32 F.3d 1512 (11th Cir.) (requirement district court make independent finding of willful perjury)
- United States v. Diaz, 190 F.3d 1247 (11th Cir.) (general finding of obstruction may suffice)
- United States v. Harold, 588 F.2d 1136 (5th Cir.) (any measurable amount of controlled substance can support drug possession)
- Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir.) (adoption of pre-1981 Fifth Circuit precedent)