United States v. Vereen, No. 17-11147 (11th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing defendant's request for a jury instruction on the innocent transitory possession defense. Even if the innocent transitory possession defense was somehow available in this circuit, the district court would not have abused its discretion in declining to give the instruction in this case, because it was plain from the record that defendant did not rid himself of possession of the firearm as promptly as reasonably possible.
The court also rejected defendant's claim that the term "unlawful possession" under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) was unconstitutionally vague. The court held that the government established that defendant's prior Florida convictions for aggravated battery and felony battery qualified as violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA); defendant's claims that his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights were violated because his sentence was increased based on the ACCA was foreclosed by binding precedent; and defendant's claim that section 922(g) is unconstitutional was also barred by binding precedent.
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.