U.S. v. Brownlee

Record contained sufficient evidence to support jury’s guilty verdict on charge of unlawful possession of firearm, even though defendant argued that Dist. Ct. improperly allowed govt. expert to testify that subject gun had been manufactured in Connecticut so as to satisfy interstate commerce element of said offense. Defendant did not challenge expert’s qualifications to give expert testimony, and expert could properly testify that manager of Connecticut plant that manufactures guns had confirmed that subject gun was made in manager’s plant. Fact that said manager did not testify at trial did not require different result.