United States v. Jerry Berry, Jr. ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 18-2199
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Jerry Lee Berry, Jr.
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines
    ____________
    Submitted: March 20, 2019
    Filed: March 26, 2019
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before ERICKSON, WOLLMAN, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Jerry Berry directly appeals after he conditionally pled guilty to being a felon
    in possession of a firearm and was sentenced to 188 months in prison. His guilty plea
    was conditioned upon his right to appeal the denial of his earlier motion to suppress
    the firearm underlying the charge. On appeal, Berry argues that the district court1
    based its denial of his suppression motion on clearly erroneous findings.
    Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in
    its relevant findings. See United States v. Bay, 
    662 F.3d 1033
    , 1035 (8th Cir. 2011)
    (when reviewing denial of motion to suppress, this court reviews questions of law
    de novo and factual findings for clear error; denial of motion to suppress will be
    affirmed unless it is unsupported by substantial evidence, based on erroneous
    interpretation of applicable law, or based on a clear mistake; factfinder’s choice
    between two permissible views of evidence cannot be clearly erroneous); see also
    United States v. Wright, 
    739 F.3d 1160
    , 1166 - 67 (8th Cir. 2014) (district court’s
    findings regarding witness credibility deserve great deference and are virtually
    unreviewable; district court’s decision to credit witness’s testimony can almost never
    be clear error unless it is contradicted by extrinsic evidence or is so internally
    inconsistent or implausible on its face that no reasonable factfinder would credit it).
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the
    Southern District of Iowa.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-2199

Filed Date: 3/26/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021