United States v. Spight, No. 15-1116 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction; the district court properly admitted the expert testimony of an ATF Special Agent because he based his opinion on the kinds of evidence the court previously considered sufficient; the court declined to consider defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in this appeal; and defendant failed to establish a Brady v. Maryland violation where defendant's argument contains no mention of an exculpatory fact, material or otherwise, withheld by the prosecution. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Shepherd, Circuit Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law. The evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm; no error in admitting expert testimony from an ATF agent that the Smith & Wesson handgun in question traveled in interstate commerce; claim of ineffective assistance of counsel would not be addressed in this direct appeal; claim of Brady violation rejected.
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.