U.S. v. Jones

Record contained sufficient evidence to support jury’s guilty verdict on drug distribution and firearm charges stemming from seizure of drugs and guns located at home that defendant and unidentified woman were located at time of seizure, even though defendant asserted that he did not reside at said home or have any sort of possession of either drugs or firearms. Record contained sufficient evidence to support notion that defendant had constructive possession of both drugs and firearms where: (1) defendant’s cell phone was located at said home on two early morning occasions days before instant search; (2) both defendant and his cell phone were found at home on day of search; (3) certain large quantity of drugs were found in open view at time of search, so as to have allowed defendant easy access and power to control said drugs; (4) firearms were located near certain drugs; and (5) certain wiretapped conversations revealed that defendant had been seeking to acquire same type of drugs found in said home. Dist. Ct. also did not err in admitting expert evidence regarding code words used by defendant and others in wiretapped phone conversations, although Dist. Ct. erred in failing to clarify for jury when said expert was testifying as expert or fact witness. However, any error was harmless, where expert’s testimony was cumulative to other properly admitted testimony.