UNITED STATES v. PRICE (2018)

Following a bench trial, Tim Kermit Price was convicted of one charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and sentenced to serve 60 months in prison and a three-year term of supervised release. Now, he argues that the evidence does not suffice to uphold his conviction because it does not show that he knowingly possessed the firearms at issue.

When presented with a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence after a bench trial, the pertinent query is whether there is substantial evidence to support the verdict. United States v. Tovar, 719 F.3d 376, 388 (5th Cir. 2013). In joint occupancy cases, such as this one, there must be some evidence to support a plausible inference that the defendant had knowledge of, and had access to, the items. United States v. Meza, 701 F.3d 411, 419 (5th Cir. 2012). There is substantial evidence to show that Price knew of the guns and had access to them. See Tovar, 719 F.3d at 388; Meza, 701 F.3d at 419.

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.