US v. Michael Felton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:11-cr-00003-JFM-16 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999232691].. [12-4551]

Appeal: 12-4551

Doc: 94

Filed: 11/04/2013

Pg: 1 of 6

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-4551

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL FOSTER FELTON, a/k/a Mike,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:11-cr-00003-JFM-16)

Submitted:

October 18, 2013

Decided:

November 4, 2013

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas J. Saunders, LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS J. SAUNDERS, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellant.
Rod J. Rosenstein, United States
Attorney, Ayn B. Ducao, Assistant United States Attorney,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-4551

Doc: 94

Filed: 11/04/2013

Pg: 2 of 6

PER CURIAM:
After

a

jury

trial,

Michael

Foster

Felton

was

convicted of one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess
with

intent

to

distribute,

including

but

not

exclusive

to

a

public housing facility or public school, one kilogram or more
of

heroin,

(2006),

in

violation

of

21

U.S.C.

§§

841,

846,

and one count of being a felon in possession of a

firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006).
challenges

the

convictions.
We

sufficiency

review

de

137 (4th Cir. 2013).
in

accepting

of

the

evidence

Felton

supporting

the

We affirm.

supporting a conviction.

evidence

860

the

the

novo

the

sufficiency

of

the

evidence

United States v. McLean, 715 F.3d 129,
We must determine whether, viewing the

light

most

factfinder’s

favorable

to

credibility

the

Government

determinations,

and
the

verdict is supported by substantial evidence, that is, “evidence
that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and
sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond
a reasonable doubt.”
(4th

Cir.

2011)

United States v. King, 628 F.3d 693, 700

(internal

quotation

marks

omitted).

“A

defendant bringing a sufficiency challenge must overcome a heavy
burden, and reversal for insufficiency must be confined to cases
where the prosecution’s failure is clear.”

2

United States v.

Appeal: 12-4551

Doc: 94

Filed: 11/04/2013

Pg: 3 of 6

Engle, 676 F.3d 405, 419 (4th Cir.) (internal quotation marks
and citations omitted), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 179 (2012).
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), it is unlawful for any
person convicted of a crime punishable by a term exceeding one
year

to

possess

a

firearm.

Proof

of

actual

or

exclusive

possession is not necessary; constructive or joint possession is
sufficient.

United States v. Lawing, 703 F.3d 229, 240 (4th

Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 1851 (2013).

“Constructive

possession is established when the government produces evidence
that shows ownership, dominion, or control over the contraband
itself or the premises or vehicle in which the contraband is
concealed.”

Id.

(internal

quotation

marks

Constructive possession is a fact-specific inquiry.

omitted).
Id.

Because Felton did not seek a judgment of acquittal on
this charge, review is for plain error.

Under this standard of

review the court must find (1) an error; (2) that is plain; and
(3) that affects substantial rights.
515 F.3d 327, 331-32 (4th Cir. 2008).
are

met,

the

error

will

not

be

United States v. Wallace,
Even if these criteria

noticed

unless

it

seriously

affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the
proceedings.

Id. at 332.

Felton argues that he did not live at the apartment
where the firearm was found and he did not have constructive
possession of the firearm.

We conclude otherwise and find that
3

Appeal: 12-4551

Doc: 94

there

is

Filed: 11/04/2013

substantial

Pg: 4 of 6

evidence

supporting

being a felon in possession of a firearm.

the

conviction

for

Felton indicated to

law enforcement that he lived at the apartment.

The one bedroom

apartment’s closets contained men’s clothing and shoes.

Felton

gave the address to others and he was present at the apartment
when law enforcement came during the course of the investigation
and

weeks

later

when

the

search

warrant

was

executed.

Accordingly, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to
show that Felton had constructive possession of the firearm.
Felton

also

contends

that

there

is

insufficient

evidence to support his drug conspiracy conviction. *
conviction

for

conspiracy

to

possess

with

the

To obtain a
intent

to

distribute a controlled substance, the Government must prove the
following essential elements:
more

persons

controlled
conspiracy;

to

possess

substance;
and

(3)

(2)
the

(1) an agreement between two or

with

the

the

intent

defendant’s

defendant’s

participation in the conspiracy.

to

distribute

knowledge

knowing

and

of

the
the

voluntary

United States v. Yearwood, 518

F.3d 220, 225-26 (4th Cir. 2008).

Once the Government proves

the existence of a conspiracy, the evidence need only establish

*

Felton’s counsel has submitted this issue under Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that he can find no
legal basis to support the claim. Felton’s position is that he
should not have been convicted of this offense.

4

Appeal: 12-4551

Doc: 94

Filed: 11/04/2013

Pg: 5 of 6

a “slight connection” between the defendant and the conspiracy
to support the conviction.

United States v. Green, 599 F.3d

360, 367 (4th Cir. 2010).

Additionally, a defendant may be

convicted of conspiracy without knowing all of its details and
even if he plays only a minor role, as long as he enters the
conspiracy understanding that it is unlawful and willfully joins
in the plan at least once.
Burgos,

94

F.3d

849,

Id. at 367-68; United States v.

858

(4th

Cir.

1996)

(en

banc).

Furthermore, a defendant may be convicted of participation in a
drug conspiracy even if there is no proof that the defendant
personally committed an overt act.

United States v. Cardwell,

433 F.3d 378, 391 (4th Cir. 2005).

A conspiracy may be proven

entirely upon circumstantial evidence.
We

have

reviewed

the

Burgos, 94 F.3d at 858.

record

and

conclude

evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.

that

the

It is not

necessary that Felton be found with heroin or that there be
testimony

or

evidence

transactions.

showing

him

involved

in

actual

drug

Evidence of tape recorded telephone calls and

text messages supports the finding that Felton had an agreement
to

distribute

participated

heroin
in

the

and

that

conspiracy.

he

knowingly
There

was

and

voluntarily

also

sufficient

evidence to show that part of the conspiracy occurred within
1000 feet of a public housing facility or a school and that the
conspiracy involved more than one kilogram of heroin.
5

Appeal: 12-4551

Doc: 94

Filed: 11/04/2013

Pg: 6 of 6

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

6