USA v. Calvin Lee Burrell, No. 06-16293 (11th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 06-16293 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT May 24, 2007 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D. C. Docket No. 06-00133-CR-2-RDP-JEO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CALVIN LEE BURRELL, a.k.a. Calvin Lee Black a.k.a. Kelvin Burrell, a.k.a. Kevin Burrell, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _________________________ (May 24, 2007) Before TJOFLAT, DUBINA and HULL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Appellant Calvin Lee Burrell appeals his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He argues that the evidence was insufficient to show: (1) that he was the individual who pawned the two firearms that are the subject of this charge; and (2) that the two rifles in question were firearms for purposes of § 922(g)(1). This court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence de novo, to determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, any reasonable juror could have concluded that the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Hunt, 187 F.3d 1269, 1270 (11th Cir. 1999). To hold that the testimony of a government witness is incredible as a matter of law, we must find that the testimony is unbelievable on its face, meaning that the facts to which the witness testified physically could not have possibly [been] observed or were events that could not have occurred under the laws of nature. United States v. Rivera, 775 F.2d 1559, 1561 (11th Cir. 1985) (internal quotations and citations omitted). In order to convict Burrell of being a felon in possession of a firearm, the jury must have found three elements: (1) that [he] was a convicted felon, (2) that [he] was in knowing possession of a firearm, and (3) that the firearm was in or affecting interstate commerce. United States v. Deleveaux, 205 F.3d 1292, 1297 2 (11th Cir. 2000). For purposes of § 922(g)(1), a firearm is defined to include any weapon which will or is designed to or may be readily converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive. United States v. Adams, 137 F.3d 1298, 1300 (11th Cir. 1998). The government need not show that the firearm is operable to sustain a conviction. Id. Because the evidence included, inter alia: (1) testimony from a pawn shop employee, who identified Burrell as the individual who pawned two firearms; (2) surveillance video of Burrell pawning the firearms; (3) pawn documents containing Burrell s signature; and (4) expert testimony stating that the items that Burrell pawned were firearms, the evidence was sufficient to permit a reasonable juror to convict Burrell. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction. AFFIRMED. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
