United States v. Shelton
1:15-cr-00350
| N.D. Ill. | Jul 12, 2017Background
- Nathan Driggers (defendant) was convicted by a jury of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person (felon) for a Ruger .22 pistol recovered from 12719 S. Halsted Street; acquitted on related count of possession of a stolen firearm.
- Parties stipulated that eight co-defendants stole ~104 Ruger firearms from a train on April 12, 2015; ~30 of those guns were implicated in Driggers’ counts, and the weapons had traveled in interstate commerce; Driggers had a prior felony conviction.
- Cooperating codefendant Marcel Turner testified he witnessed a sale on April 12, 2015 at a shop identified as 12719 S. Halsted where Driggers (identified as “Nate”) negotiated and began counting cash for ~30 stolen guns; Turner admitted earlier lies to authorities but testified consistently at trial.
- Law-enforcement recovered the serial-numbered Ruger at 12719 S. Halsted during a September 10, 2015 search; the building’s owner/manager and documents tied Driggers to the lease; phone and historical cell-site records corroborated movements and communications among Driggers and co-defendants on April 12–13, 2015.
- Agents also executed warrants on storage units linked to Warren Gates and seized six stolen Rugers; phone records showed a new contact between Driggers and Gates on April 13, 2015. Driggers rested without presenting evidence and moved under Rules 29 and 33 after conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence of knowing possession | Government: Turner’s testimony, the recovered weapon at Driggers’ leased property, lease documents, phone records, and cell-site data together support a guilty verdict | Driggers: Turner was unreliable/uncorroborated; evidence insufficient as a matter of law | Court: Evidence sufficient; credibility resolved by jury; corroborating physical and phone records support conviction |
| Instruction on joint/constructive possession | Government: Instruction appropriate to allow jury to consider shared possession where multiple possible possessors existed | Driggers: No evidence connecting co-lessee Odom to the gun; joint-possession instruction prejudicial | Court: Joint-possession instruction proper (pattern instruction); relevant given cross-examination suggesting other possible possessors; no prejudice |
| Admission of evidence about guns in Gates’s storage units | Government: Relevant circumstantial evidence — Gates later had stolen guns and phoned Driggers the day after the sale, supporting inference Driggers sold/redistributed guns | Driggers: Irrelevant; government improperly suggested Driggers sold guns to Gates; may contradict other testimony | Court: Evidence admissible under Rule 401 as it made possession and distribution more probable; not unduly prejudicial; admission not erroneous |
| Motion for new trial under Rule 33 based on witness unreliability | Government: Trial procedures (jury credibility determination, corroboration) make new trial unwarranted | Driggers: Turner’s prior lies and inconsistencies justify new trial | Court: Denied; trial testimony found credible and corroborated, jury instructions and evidence proper |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jones, 713 F.3d 336 (7th Cir.) (standard: view evidence in light most favorable to government)
- United States v. Tucker, 737 F.3d 1090 (7th Cir.) (difficulty of prevailing on insufficiency claim)
- United States v. Morris, 576 F.3d 661 (7th Cir.) (insufficiency standard cited)
- United States v. Ajayi, 808 F.3d 1113 (7th Cir.) (no rational juror standard for insufficiency review)
- United States v. Lawrence, 788 F.3d 234 (7th Cir.) (circumstantial evidence can support conviction)
- United States v. Moore, 572 F.3d 334 (7th Cir.) (same)
- Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90 (Sup. Ct.) (circumstantial evidence sufficient in criminal cases)
- Allen v. Chicago Transit Authority, 317 F.3d 696 (7th Cir.) (perjury does not mandate wholesale disregard of testimony)
- United States v. Kuzniar, 881 F.2d 466 (7th Cir.) (credibility left to jury absent contradiction of indisputable facts)
- United States v. Elder, 840 F.3d 455 (7th Cir.) (jury’s province to weigh witness consistency)
- United States v. Muthana, 60 F.3d 1217 (7th Cir.) (assessing witness credibility belongs to jury)
- United States v. White, 443 F.3d 582 (7th Cir.) (standard for instruction error and prejudice)
- United States v. Smith, 415 F.3d 682 (7th Cir.) (instruction error and prejudice framework)
- Draper v. Martin, 664 F.3d 1110 (7th Cir.) (court not obligated to research or construct parties’ arguments)
- APS Sports Collectibles, Inc. v. Sports Time, Inc., 299 F.3d 624 (7th Cir.) (same)