United States v. Marty Crafton

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 15, 1998
Docket97-2499
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Marty Crafton (United States v. Marty Crafton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Marty Crafton, (8th Cir. 1998).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 97-2499 ___________

United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Marty Linn Crafton, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * ___________

Submitted: March 26, 1998 Filed: April 15, 1998 ___________

Before McMILLIAN, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and BEAM, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

An indictment charged Marty Linn Crafton with being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e). After a jury found him guilty, the district court1 sentenced him to 210 months in prison. Crafton appeals his conviction, and his counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the sufficiency of the evidence.

1 The Honorable Stephen M. Reasoner, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. At trial, Crafton stipulated he had been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; a number of witnesses testified they observed Crafton holding a gun one evening during a scuffle at an Arkansas bar; and the bar owner testified he took the gun from Crafton and gave it to the police. In addition, an agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms testified that the gun had been manufactured in Massachusetts. Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude the government met its burden of proof. See United States v. Horsman, 114 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 1997) (elements of § 922(g)(1) offense), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 702 (1998); United States v. Balanga, 109 F.3d 1299, 1301 (8th Cir. 1997) (standard of review). After reviewing the record for any nonfrivolous issues in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), and having found none, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Gregory Lynn Balanga
109 F.3d 1299 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)
United States v. Donovan Walter Horsman
114 F.3d 822 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Marty Crafton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-marty-crafton-ca8-1998.