Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 1 of 7
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-12210
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-20663-CMA-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
THEOPHILUS JAMES KEATON,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(February 25, 2013)
Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and KRAVTICH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Theophilus Keaton was convicted after a jury trial on three counts:
possession of a firearm and ammunition by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§
Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 2 of 7
922(g)(1) and 924(e) (Count 1); possession of controlled substances with intent to
distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (Count 2); and possession of a
firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c)(1)(A) (Count 3). Keaton was sentenced to 360 months’ imprisonment.
He now appeals, arguing the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support
his convictions. 1
I.
We recite the following facts adduced at trial in the light most favorable to
the verdict. In April 2011, Officers James Randle and Pierre Chery of the Miami
Police Department were patrolling the area around the Liberty Square apartment
complex in marked police vehicles. Randle spotted a suspicious man, later
identified as Keaton, who appeared to be trying to avoid detection. Randle got out
of his vehicle to investigate, and Keaton ran. Randle and Chery pursued Keaton,
and Randle ultimately arrested him.
1
Keaton also contends that the imposition of his sentence violated his Fifth and Sixth
Amendment rights because his prior convictions were not alleged in the indictment and were not
found by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is unconstitutional
because it exceeds Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause and the Tenth Amendment.
These arguments are squarely foreclosed by binding precedent. See Almendarez-Torres v.
United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247 (1998) (holding that prior convictions need not be alleged in the
indictment nor proven beyond a reasonable doubt); United States v. Scott, 263 F.3d 1270, 1274
(11th Cir. 2001) (rejecting a Commerce Clause challenge to § 922(g)(1)); N. Ala. Express, Inc. v.
Interstate Commerce Comm’n, 971 F.2d 661, 666 (11th Cir. 1992) (“Because the Tenth
Amendment reserves only those powers not already delegated to the federal government, [it is]
violated only if [the law in question] goes beyond the limits of Congress’ power under the
Commerce Clause.”).
2
Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 3 of 7
At trial, Officer Randle testified that, shortly after beginning to follow
Keaton, he observed a bulge in Keaton’s waistband that he suspected was a
firearm. During the pursuit, Keaton also reached for his waistband and pulled out
a sandwich bag, which Randle testified is commonly used to store narcotics.
While still carrying the sandwich bag, Keaton ran into the front door of an
apartment. Randle ran around to the back of the building from the outside, and
observed Keaton, who had apparently exited the apartment, kneeling at the rear
exterior wall as if he were disposing of something in the bushes. Keaton then
reached into his waistband again, removed a large black object, and threw it near
the back exterior wall. He stood up and continued to flee, but Randle apprehended
him.
Officer Chery also testified at trial. When Keaton entered the apartment,
Chery followed him inside and observed him run through the back door. Chery
followed and immediately noticed a firearm in a black holster on the ground just
outside the back door of the apartment. Later, Chery located a sandwich bag
containing marijuana and powder and crack cocaine in individual baggies hidden
under the grass behind the apartment. Officer Kim Ivy also testified, corroborating
the testimony that the firearm was found near the back exterior wall of the
apartment. He also testified that, upon examining the firearm, he discovered it was
loaded and had a bullet in the chamber.
3
Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 4 of 7
The government also offered evidence of Keaton’s prior convictions,
including his 1997 convictions for carrying a concealed firearm and possession of
cocaine with intent to distribute, 2008 convictions for possession of cocaine with
intent to distribute and resisting a police officer, and 2009 convictions for
possession of cocaine and marijuana with intent to distribute and resisting a police
officer.
II.
“We review the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict de
novo, but in so doing, we must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the
verdict.” United States v. McGuire, No. 11-12052, — F.3d — (11th Cir. Jan. 30,
2013). We cannot overturn the jury’s verdict “if any reasonable construction of the
evidence would have allowed the jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.” United States v. Herrera, 931 F.2d 761, 762 (11th Cir. 1991).
To convict Keaton on Count 1, the government was required to prove that:
(1) Keaton was a convicted felon; (2) he knew he was in possession of a firearm
and ammunition; and (3) the firearm and ammunition “affected or [were] in
interstate commerce.” United States v. Wright, 392 F.3d 1269, 1273 (11th Cir.
2004). Because the parties stipulated to the first and third elements, only knowing
possession was at issue. We conclude that the government put forth sufficient
evidence from which the jury could conclude Keaton knowingly possessed a
4
Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 5 of 7
firearm and ammunition. Officer Randle testified that he saw a bulge in Keaton’s
waistband that was consistent with Keaton carrying a firearm. He also testified
that he saw Keaton dispose of a black object near the back wall of the apartment.
Immediately after, Officer Chery spotted a firearm in a black holster in that
location, which Officer Ivy determined was loaded. A jury could reasonably
conclude from this evidence that Keaton knowingly possessed a firearm.
Count 2 required the government to prove “(1) knowing (2) possession of a
controlled substance (3) with intent to distribute it.” United States v. Farris, 77
F.3d 391, 395 (11th Cir. 1996). Here too, the government offered sufficient
evidence. Officer Randle testified that he saw Keaton carrying a sandwich bag
when he entered the apartment and then kneeling behind the apartment moments
later apparently hiding something. This is consistent with Officer Chery’s
recovery of the sandwich bag containing marijuana and powder and crack cocaine
under a strip of grass. It was reasonable for the jury to infer Keaton knowingly
possessed controlled substances from this testimony. And the government
established intent to distribute by reading to the jury a stipulation of Keaton’s four
prior convictions for possession of controlled substances with intent to deliver,
which were probative of Keaton’s intent under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). Further, the
jury heard testimony that the drugs were in individually wrapped baggies, which
5
Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 6 of 7
indicated Keaton’s intent to distribute. Accordingly, the evidence presented at trial
was sufficient to support the conviction on Count 2.
To convict Keaton on Count 3, the government was required to prove that
Keaton “(1) knowingly (2) possessed a firearm (3) in furtherance of any drug
trafficking crime for which he could be prosecuted in a court of the United States.”
United States v. Woodard, 531 F.3d 1352, 1362 (11th Cir. 2008). As discussed
above, there was sufficient evidence to conclude that Keaton knowingly possessed
a firearm during a drug-trafficking crime. And the evidence was also sufficient to
conclude that possession was in furtherance of the drug-trafficking crime. The
government’s evidence indicated that Keaton was carrying a firearm in his
waistband, an easily accessible location, while carrying individually packaged
drugs. The firearm agents found was loaded and had a bullet in the chamber.
Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the jury could conclude from this
evidence that the firearm facilitated Keaton’s drug trafficking. Cf. id. (noting that
a jury could reasonably infer that a pistol was carried in furtherance of a drug-
trafficking crime when it was loaded and easily accessible while the defendant was
taking delivery of packages containing marijuana).
III.
6
Case: 12-12210 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 7 of 7
In sum, the evidence offered at trial was sufficient to allow the jury to find
Keaton guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on all three counts of the indictment.
Accordingly, we affirm Keaton’s convictions and sentence.
AFFIRMED.
7