[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-10555 SEPTEMBER 7, 2006
Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-00139-CR-4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JERRY ORENTHAL GREEN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Georgia
_________________________
(September 7, 2006)
Before ANDERSON, BIRCH and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
After his conviction by a jury for possession of a firearm by a convicted
felon, Jerry Orenthal Green filed a motion for a new trial pursuant to Federal Rule
of Criminal Procedure 33(b), arguing that there was insufficient evidence to
support his conviction. He appeals the denial of that motion.
We review claims of insufficient evidence to convict de novo. United States
v. Nolan, 223 F.3d 1311, 1314 (11th Cir. 2000) (per curiam). Viewing the
evidence in the light most favorable to the government, we affirm the conviction if,
based on this evidence, “any rational trier of fact could have found the essential
elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. (citation omitted).
Green argues that no rational jury could have convicted him because there
was insufficient evidence that he knew he was in possession of a firearm. He
argues that the evidence fails to support either his actual or constructive possession
of a firearm. We find, however, after reviewing the record and considering the
evidence in a light most favorable to the government, that a rational jury could
have found that Green knowingly possessed a firearm. Two law enforcement
officers testified at the trial that they approached Green at the Sey Hey Lounge
because Green met the description of a person who was identified as being in
possession of a firearm. When the officers approached Green and asked him to
step outside, a struggle ensued and one officer “personally observed” Green reach
2
into the waistband of his pants and grab with his right hand what “appeared to be a
silver and black pistol” and fling it after grabbing it. Green testified that he is left-
handed, received a pat-down before entering the lounge, that other club patrons
threw contraband on the floor, and that his fingerprints were not found on the
firearm. But another officer testified that he visually followed the firearm, keeping
it within his sight, and then retrieved it and handed it to a third officer. A third
officer testified that although he did not see Green throw the firearm, the only
people in the vicinity where the firearm was thrown were the officers themselves.
The testimony of these three law enforcement officers was sufficient to link Green
to the firearm, and the jury was entitled to believe them instead of Green.
Accordingly, his conviction is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
3