[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
April 12, 2007
No. 06-13133 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-00033-CR-4-RH
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KURTIS TYRONE WRIGHT,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
_________________________
(April 12, 2007)
Before DUBINA, CARNES and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Kurtis Wright appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a
convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). Wright
contends that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of the offense. After
careful review of the parties arguments and the record on appeal, we affirm.
“We review challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, viewing
the evidence in the light most favorable to the government.” At Wright’s trial, the
government produced evidence that: (1) Wright at one time admitted committing
the bank robbery using a 9-millimeter pistol; (2) while incarcerated Wright
described the bank robbery and his possession of the 9-millimeter pistol to a fellow
inmate; (3) Wright admitted at trial that he had touched a black pistol on the day of
the robbery; (4) Wright led police on a high-speed chase using a vehicle that
matched the description of the vehicle used in the robbery and that was carrying
men who matched the description of the men who committed the armed bank
robbery; and (5) two loaded firearms, resembling those used in the bank robbery,
were located in the trailer that Wright was parked in front of when spotted by
police. While Wright questions the credibility of his fellow inmate’s testimony
because the inmate stood to benefit from it, we have determined that the fact that
testimony may benefit the person giving it does not make the testimony incredible.
See United States v. Chastain, 198 F.3d 1338, 1561 (11th Cir. 1999). Thus, it was
for the jury to decide whether to believe the testimony. Similarly, the jury could
2
find Wright’s testimony that the gun he touched was not one of the guns
introduced at trial lacked credibility. If disbelieved, Wright’s testimony could be
used as substantive evidence of his guilt. United States v. Woodward, 459 F.3d
1078, 1087 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam).
We find that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find that Wright was
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon
under § 922(g)(1). Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
3