Although Not Ideal, Possession Instruction Sufficient

U.S. v. Jameson (Christopher, not Tom), 2007 WL 614267 (3/1/07) - There was sufficient evidence the defendant possessed a gun when the gun was in a jointly occupied car. Although proximity to the gun is not enough, here the gun was found in plain view where the defendant's feet had been and when the car was stopped the defendant leaned forward as though he was hiding something underneath the seat in front of him.

The 10th expresses a preference for an instruction that explicitly states the government must prove a connection between the particular defendant and the firearm and mere proximity to the firearm is insufficient to establish possession. But, the d.ct.'s failure to give such an instruction was not reversible error because it sort of said the same thing when it said being present with others who possess the object is not possession and momentary control of an object without criminal intent is not possession. There could be a case where the d.ct. must instruct on nexus, but not here where there was a "significant quantum" of evidence aside from presence and proximity.

Two "momentary" references to a bayonet lying on the seat where the defendant had been sitting did not warrant a mistrial because the references did not confuse the jury about whether the defendant should be convicted for possessing the bayonet as opposed to the gun.