US v. Ernest Johnson
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:11-cr-00054-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998935098].. [12-4120]
Appeal: 12-4120
Doc: 25
Filed: 09/11/2012
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4120
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ERNEST JAMES JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Huntington.
Robert C. Chambers,
District Judge. (3:11-cr-00054-1)
Submitted:
August 31, 2012
Decided:
September 11, 2012
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dana F. Eddy, EDDY LAW OFFICE, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin II, United States Attorney, Joseph
F. Adams, Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 12-4120
Doc: 25
Filed: 09/11/2012
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Ernest
order
denying
James
his
Johnson
motion
appeals
for
a
alternatively, for a new trial.
the
district
judgment
of
court’s
acquittal
or,
On appeal, Johnson contends
that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of possession
of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2006), and that the trial court
abused its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial.
We
affirm.
Johnson contends that there was insufficient evidence
before the jury to support his § 924(c) conviction.
Johnson
challenges only the jury’s finding that he possessed the firearm
in furtherance of the drug trafficking offense.
A jury verdict
must be sustained “if, viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable
to
the
prosecution,
substantial evidence.”
the
verdict
is
supported
by
United States v. Smith, 451 F.3d 209,
216 (4th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Whether
a
a
firearm
trafficking
United
“furthered,
advanced,
crime
.
States
v.
.
.
Perry,
is
560
or
helped
ultimately
a
F.3d
254
(internal quotation marks omitted).
246,
forward
factual
(4th
drug
question.”
Cir.
2009)
We have reviewed the record
and conclude that the Government presented sufficient evidence
from which the jury could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt
2
Appeal: 12-4120
Doc: 25
Filed: 09/11/2012
Pg: 3 of 3
that Johnson was guilty of possessing a firearm in furtherance
of a drug trafficking crime.
Johnson also asserts that the district court erred by
denying his motion for a new trial following the admission of
testimony regarding his prior conviction for armed robbery.
“We
review for abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of a
motion for a new trial.”
320 (4th Cir. 2003).
United States v. Perry, 335 F.3d 316,
After reviewing the record, we conclude
that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
Johnson’s motion.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
We
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?