United States v. Boujaoude
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
1. Even without the actual gun, there was more than enough evidence-the gun case, the ATF form, the book, the gun dealer’s testimony and defendant’s own admission-for the jury to conclude that defendant possessed a firearm. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (finding sufficient evidence where, “after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the [817] prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt”).
2. We’ve already held that a defendant “need not have known that he was in the United States illegally to ‘knowingly violate’ 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) as knowledge pertains only to the item possessed and not to the status of the possessor.” United States v. Montero-Camargo, 177 F.3d 1113, 1120 (9th Cir.), withdrawn, 192 F.3d 946 (9th Cir.1999), opinion reinstated in relevant part, 208 F.3d 1122, 1128 n. 8 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
56 F. App'x 816 (United States v. Boujaoude) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.