US v. Sean Sterling, No. 09-4205 (4th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4205 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SEAN VICTOR STERLING, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00179-RDB-7) Submitted: November 3, 2010 Decided: November 12, 2010 Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M. Gordon Tayback, LAW OFFICES OF M. GORDON TAYBACK, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Tonya Kelly Kowitz, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sean Sterling appeals his convictions of two counts of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime resulting in death, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(j) (2006). On appeal, Sterling contends that the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that he possessed the weapons in furtherance of a heroin conspiracy. A defendant We affirm. challenging evidence faces a heavy burden. F.3d 233, 245 (4th Cir. 2007). the sufficiency of the United States v. Foster, 507 We review a sufficiency of the evidence challenge by determining whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, any rational trier of fact could find the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Collins, 412 F.3d 515, 519 (4th Cir. 2005); see Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). We review both direct and circumstantial evidence, and accord the Government all reasonable inferences from the facts shown to those sought to be established. States v. Harvey, 532 F.3d 326, 333 (4th Cir. 2008). evidence jury supports decides different, which reasonable interpretation to United [I]f the interpretations, the believe[.] United States v. Murphy, 35 F.3d 143, 148 (4th Cir. 1994). We will uphold the jury s verdict if substantial evidence supports it, 2 and will reverse only in those rare cases of clear failure by the prosecution. After evidence was Foster, 507 F.3d at 244-45. reviewing sufficient the to record, support we conclude Sterling s that the convictions. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. dispense with oral argument because the facts and We legal contentions are adequately expressed in the materials before the court and argument will not aid the decisional process. 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.