United States v. Braithwaite ( 2010 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4229
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DENTON SOLOMON BRAITHWAITE, a/k/a James Keitt,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (1:08-cr-00054-JAB-1)
Submitted: July 14, 2010 Decided: July 22, 2010
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James B. Craven, III, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Harry L. Hobgood,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Denton Solomon Braithwaite appeals his conviction of
aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1028A(a)(1)
(2006) (Count 3). On appeal, Braithwaite contends that the
evidence is insufficient to convict him of Count 3, as the
Government failed to prove that Braithwaite knew that the means
of identification used belonged to another individual. We
affirm.
“A defendant challenging the sufficiency of the
evidence faces a heavy burden.” United States v. Foster, 507
F.3d 233, 245 (4th Cir. 2007). This court reviews a sufficiency
of the evidence challenge by determining whether, viewing the
evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, any
rational trier of fact could find the essential elements of the
crime beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Collins, 412
F.3d 515, 519 (4th Cir. 2005); see Glasser v. United States, 315
U.S. 60, 80 (1942). This court reviews both direct and
circumstantial evidence, and accords the Government all
reasonable inferences from the facts shown to those sought to be
established. United States v. Harvey, 532 F.3d 326, 333 (4th
Cir. 2008). This court will uphold the jury’s verdict if
substantial evidence supports it, and will reverse only in those
rare cases of clear failure by the prosecution. Foster, 507
F.3d at 244-45.
2
In order to prove a violation of 18 U.S.C.
1028A(a)(1), the Government must demonstrate that: (1) during
the commission of a predicate felony offense, (2) the defendant
knowingly transferred, possessed, or used without lawful
authority; (3) a means of identification of another person; and
(4) the defendant knew the means of identification belonged to
another person. See Flores-Figueroa, 129 S. Ct. at 1888, 1894.
Braithwaite concedes the first three elements, only challenging
whether the Government proved that he knew the means of
identification he used actually belonged to another person.
After reviewing the record, we find that a rational trier of
fact could find this element beyond a reasonable doubt.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We
dispense with oral argument, as the facts and legal contentions
are adequately expressed in the materials before the court, and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3