United States of America v. Willie Lee Berry

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 99-4360
WILLIE LEE BERRY,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge.
(CR-98-18)
Argued: May 5, 2000
Decided: May 30, 2000
Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges,
and Irene M. KEELEY, United States District Judge for the
Northern District of West Virginia, sitting by designation.
_________________________________________________________________
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL
ARGUED: Scott Hadden Gsell, LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT
GSELL, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Brian Lee Whisler,
Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON
BRIEF: Mark T. Calloway, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

-- 1 of 2 --

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
_________________________________________________________________
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Willie Lee Berry appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm
by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (West
Supp. 1999). Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
Berry claims on appeal that the evidence was insufficient to sup-
port the jury's finding that he knowingly possessed the firearm that
was found in the vehicle that he was driving. We review a jury verdict
for the sufficiency of the evidence by determining whether there is
substantial evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the
Government, to support the verdict. See Glasser v. United States, 315
U.S. 60, 80 (1942). In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence, we
do not review the credibility of the witnesses, and we assume that the
jury resolved all contradictions in the testimony in favor of the Gov-
ernment. See United States v. Romer, 148 F.3d 359, 364 (4th Cir.
1998), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 119 S.Ct. 1032 (1999). A review
of the record discloses that substantial evidence supported Berry's
conviction. See United States v. Johnson, 55 F.3d 976, 979 (4th Cir.
1995).
Moreover, the facts surrounding Berry's arrest are sufficiently dis-
tinguishable from those in United States v. Blue , 957 F.2d 106 (4th
Cir. 1992). Unlike the appellant in Blue, who was merely a front seat
passenger, Berry was the driver and sole occupant of his vehicle when
the police stopped it. In addition, the firearm, which was found under
the right front passenger seat toward the driver's side of the car, was
well within Berry's reach and, thus, his dominion and control.
Accordingly, we affirm Berry's conviction and sentence.
AFFIRMED
2

-- 2 of 2 --