United States v. Matlock

04-50137Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitOct 20, 2004

Full text

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
October 20, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-50137
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BETHANY MELLISSA MATLOCK,
also known as Bethany Mellissa Stratford,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-03-CR-68-ALL
--------------------
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Bethany Mellissa Matlock appeals a jury conviction for drug
trafficking and related firearms offenses. She contends that the
evidence was insufficient to prove that she actively employed a
firearm in relation to the drug-trafficking offense.
Contrary to Matlock’s contentions, the Government was not
required to prove active employment of the firearm, but only that
is was possessed in furtherance of the drug-trafficking crime.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 04-50137
-2-
See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A); United States v. Ceballos-Torres,
218 F.3d 409, 413 & n.5 (5th Cir. 2000).
Because Matlock did not move for a judgment of acquittal,
this court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence “only for a
manifest miscarriage of justice--the record must be devoid of
evidence of guilt or the evidence must be so tenuous that a
conviction is shocking.” United States v. Avants, 367 F.3d 433,
449 (5th Cir. 2004). The evidence showed that a loaded handgun
was easily accessible in Matlock’s small house where drugs and
money were found and where persons were attempting to buy drugs.
This evidence is sufficient to establish that Matlock possessed a
firearm in furtherance of the drug-trafficking offense. See
Ceballos-Torres, 218 F.3d at 414-15.
The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.