Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    United States v. Mercer, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Reginald Wayne Mercer appealed his conviction for knowingly possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. 2) On appeal, Mercer argued there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. 3) The appellate court rejected Mercer's argument that the jury should have believed his testimony over that of government witnesses, as witness credibility is solely for the jury to determine. The court affirmed both Mercer's conviction and sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Mercer, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views3 pages
    1) Reginald Wayne Mercer appealed his conviction for knowingly possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. 2) On appeal, Mercer argued there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. 3) The appellate court rejected Mercer's argument that the jury should have believed his testimony over that of government witnesses, as witness credibility is solely for the jury to determine. The court affirmed both Mercer's conviction and sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-11-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-4379

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Reginald Wayne Mercer appealed his conviction for knowingly possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. 2) On appeal, Mercer argued there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. 3) The appellate court rejected Mercer's argument that the jury should have believed his testimony over that of government witnesses, as witness credibility is solely for the jury to determine. The court affirmed both Mercer's conviction and sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    2 views3 pages

    United States v. Mercer, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Reginald Wayne Mercer appealed his conviction for knowingly possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. 2) On appeal, Mercer argued there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. 3) The appellate court rejected Mercer's argument that the jury should have believed his testimony over that of government witnesses, as witness credibility is solely for the jury to determine. The court affirmed both Mercer's conviction and sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-4379

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    REGINALD WAYNE MERCER,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,
    Chief District Judge. (1:05-cr-00253-NCT)

    Submitted:

    October 31, 2006

    Decided:

    November 15, 2006

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, William S. Trivette,


    Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Michael A.
    DeFranco, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Reginald Wayne Mercer appeals his conviction following a
    jury trial for knowingly possessing a firearm as a convicted felon,
    in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2000).

    Mercer

    was sentenced to ten years imprisonment.


    On appeal, Mercer argues there was insufficient evidence
    to support his conviction.

    In reviewing a sufficiency challenge,

    [t]he verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is substantial


    evidence, taking the view most favorable to the Government, to
    support it.

    Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942).

    Substantial evidence, in the context of a criminal action, is


    that evidence a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate
    and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendants guilt
    beyond a reasonable doubt.
    862 (4th Cir. 1996).

    United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849,

    A defendant challenging the sufficiency of

    the evidence to support his conviction bears a heavy burden.


    United States v. Beidler, 110 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1997).
    We reject Mercers assertion that his conviction was
    legally insufficient because the jury did not believe his testimony
    and instead credited that of the Governments witnesses.

    Witness

    credibility is solely within the province of the jury and will not
    be reassessed on appeal.
    56, 60 (4th Cir. 1989).

    See United States v. Saunders, 886 F.2d


    As such, this argument is plainly

    insufficient to meet the heavy burden demanded of a criminal

    - 2 -

    defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence underlying


    his criminal conviction. Beidler, 110 F.3d at 1067. Therefore, we
    affirm Mercers conviction and sentence.
    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 -

    You might also like