U.S. v. Pulliam

Defendant was not entitled to new trial on charge of possession of firearm by felon under 18 USC section 922(g)(1), even though jury instruction did not inform jury that govt. had burden to prove that defendant knew he was felon at time of his possession of firearm. While failure to give said instruction constituted plain error under Rehaif, 139 S. Ct. 2191, said error did not create risk of miscarriage of justice, where record contained strong circumstantial evidence that defendant knew that he was felon given multiple nature of his prior felony convictions and multiple-year sentences. Dist. Ct. also did not err in precluding defendant from introducing his prior statement of “what gun” to police at scene of his arrest, where said statement qualified as hearsay statement suggesting denial that he possessed gun. Dist. Ct. also did not abuse its discretion in allowing govt. to elicit testimony that defendant possessed $408 at time of arrest, where said testimony went to defendant’s motive to possess firearm, especially where motive was hotly contested by parties. Also, while admission of evidence regarding contents of radio dispatch that suggested that defendant was dealing drugs had only minimal probative value with respect to instant firearm charges, any error was harmless given strength of evidence showing that defendant actually possessed firearm.