United States of America v. Howard Chen

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Honorable John W. Sedwick, United States District Judge for the**
District of Alaska, sitting by designation.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HOWARD CHEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-50129
D.C. No. 2:07-cr-00463-JFW-1
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted November 6, 2009
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and SEDWICK, District**
Judge.
The district court did not err in denying Chen’s motion for an acquittal or
new trial on his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) because, viewing the evidence
in the light most favorable to the government, any rational trier of fact could have
FILED
NOV 17 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
found Chen guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of possessing a firearm “in
furtherance of” the drug crime. See United States v. Thongsy, 577 F.3d 1036, 1040
(9th Cir. 2009). A rational juror could have found that at the time the deputy
sheriff stopped Chen, he was en route to an agreed-upon location to sell drugs and
had put the gun in the trunk of his rental car to have it available during the drug
transaction. See United States v. Hector, 474 F.3d 1150, 1157 (9th Cir. 2007).
Nor did the district court err in denying Chen’s motion to suppress. The
challenged warrant indicated that the Welland Street house had been under
surveillance; that the agents observed Chen leave the Welland Street house and
without making any further stops, proceed to a location where Chen sold drugs;
and that Chen had set up a further drug sale transaction at an agreed-upon location
in Rosemead. In light of this information, and the logical inference that drugs may
be found in a house if a person leaves that house, makes no other stops, and is then
found in possession of drugs, the warrant was not “so lacking in indicia of probable
cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.” United
States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 923 (1984) (quotation marks omitted).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --