United States v. Terrance Harrell ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •            Case: 18-11038   Date Filed: 03/08/2019   Page: 1 of 4
    [DO NOT PUBLISH]
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________
    No. 18-11038
    Non-Argument Calendar
    ________________________
    D.C. Docket No. 1:17-cr-20291-MGC-1
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    TERRANCE HARRELL,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    ________________________
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Florida
    ________________________
    (March 8, 2019)
    Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JILL PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:
    Case: 18-11038    Date Filed: 03/08/2019    Page: 2 of 4
    Terrance Harrell appeals his conviction for being a felon in possession of a
    firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Harrell challenges the sufficiency of the evidence
    to support his conviction. We affirm.
    We review de novo the denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal.
    United States v. Gamory, 
    635 F.3d 480
    , 497 (11th Cir. 2011). “We view the
    evidence in the light most favorable to the government, making all reasonable
    inferences and credibility choices in [its] favor, and then determine whether a
    reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    
    Id. (alteration adopted,
    internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “Credibility
    determinations are the exclusive province of the jury” and we accept them unless
    the testimony is incredible as a matter of law. United States v. Calderon, 
    127 F.3d 1314
    , 1325 (11th Cir. 1997) (quoting United States v. Parrado, 
    911 F.2d 1567
    ,
    1571 (11th Cir. 1990)). To be incredible as a matter of law, testimony must be
    “unbelievable on its face,” in that it conveys “facts that the witness physically
    could not have possibly observed or events that could not have occurred under the
    laws of nature.” 
    Id. (quoting United
    States v. Rivera, 
    775 F.2d 1559
    , 1561 (11th
    Cir. 1985)).
    The crime of possessing a firearm as a felon is comprised of three elements,
    two of which are not in dispute. Harrell admitted that he had been convicted of a
    felony offense and that a Glock nine-millimeter handgun discovered in his parents’
    2
    Case: 18-11038      Date Filed: 03/08/2019   Page: 3 of 4
    yard had traveled in interstate commerce. The sole issue in dispute at trial was
    whether Harrell possessed the handgun.
    The district court did not err by denying Harrell’s motion for a judgment of
    acquittal. Testimony from Detectives Thomas Wever and Alexis Marrero,
    statements recorded by Wever’s body camera, and the detectives’ discovery of the
    Glock handgun and accessories unique to that firearm provided sufficient evidence
    that Harrell possessed the firearm. After leading the detectives on a high-speed car
    chase, Harrell abandoned his vehicle and fled on foot through his parents’ yard
    while gripping his waistband in an “awkward way.” The body camera recorded
    that when Detective Wever saw Harrell display a semi-automatic handgun with an
    extended magazine, he warned “gun, gun, gun, 55” to his fellow officers and
    ordered Harrell to display his hands and “drop the gun.” Detective Marrero then
    witnessed Harrell “throw up his arm and . . . saw a . . . black gun[] with a long
    magazine . . . in the air” moments before Harrell fell to the ground. Detective
    Marrero discovered a Glock handgun lying on the ground close to Harrell’s route
    through the yard, and Detective Wever seized a holster for the Glock handgun
    from the floorboard beneath the driver’s seat in Harrell’s car. Detective Marrero
    also found an ammunition magazine for the Glock handgun in the rear seat of his
    patrol car after he transported Harrell to the police station. Harrell argues about
    inconsistencies in the detectives’ testimony, but because their statements were not
    3
    Case: 18-11038     Date Filed: 03/08/2019   Page: 4 of 4
    incredible as a matter of law, we must accept the jury’s finding that the testimony
    was credible. See 
    Calderon, 127 F.3d at 1325
    .
    We AFFIRM Harrell’s judgment of conviction.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-11038

Filed Date: 3/8/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021