PEOPLE OF MI V ANTONIO SMITH
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
February 17, 2004
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 243742
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 01-008411-02
ANTONIO SMITH,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Schuette, P.J., and Meter and Owens, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Following a nonjury trial, defendant was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon
(CCW), MCL 750.227, felon in possession of a firearm, MCL 750.224f, and possession of a
firearm during the commission of a felony, second offense MCL 750.227b. He was sentenced to
five years on the felony-firearm conviction and to a consecutive sentence of one month to three
years for being an habitual offender, fourth offense. MCL 769.12. We affirm. This appeal is
being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Defendant first contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions on
the weapons offenses.
A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a bench trial is reviewed de novo on
appeal. People v Sherman-Huffman, 241 Mich App 264, 265; 615 NW2d 776 (2000), aff’d 466
Mich 39; 642 NW2d 339 (2002). This Court reviews the evidence in a light most favorable to
the prosecution to determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found that each element
of the crime was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. People v Harmon, 248 Mich App 522, 524;
640 NW2d 314 (2001). The trial court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error. A finding
of fact is considered “clearly erroneous if, after review of the entire record, the appellate court is
left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” People v Gistover, 189
Mich App 44, 46; 472 NW2d 27 (1991). “An appellate court will defer to the trial court’s
resolution of factual issues, especially where it involves the credibility of witnesses.” People v
Cartwright, 454 Mich 550, 555; 563 NW2d 208 (1997).
Felon in possession of a firearm and felony-firearm share the common element of
possession of a firearm. MCL 750.227b(1); MCL 750.227f(1), (2). CCW requires that the
defendant carry a weapon. MCL 750.227(1). “Carrying” is similar to possession and denotes
intentional control or dominion over the weapon. People v Butler, 413 Mich 377, 390 n 11; 319
-1-
NW2d 540 (1982). Possession of a weapon may be actual or constructive and may be proved by
circumstantial evidence. People v Hill, 433 Mich 464, 469-470; 446 NW2d 140 (1989).
The witnesses testified that they saw a gun in defendant’s hand, once during an attempt to
dispose of the weapon and several minutes later when he actually threw it away. Such evidence,
if believed, was sufficient to prove possession. People v Avant, 235 Mich App 499, 505-506;
597 NW2d 864 (1999); People v Espinosa, 142 Mich App 99, 102-103, 106; 369 NW2d 265
(1985); People v Reynolds, 38 Mich App 159, 161; 195 NW2d 870 (1972).
Defendant next contends that his convictions of felon in possession of a firearm and
felony-firearm violated the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. We find no merit
to this unpreserved issue, which was considered and rejected in People v Dillard, 246 Mich App
163; 631 NW2d 755 (2001).
Affirmed.
/s/ Bill Schuette
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
/s/ Donald S. Owens
-2-
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.
