Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (October 15, 1991)
Docket number: 90-5191
Permanent Link:
http://vlex.com/vid/37400399
Id. vLex: VLEX-37400399
Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-89-31)
William F. Marscher, III, Vaux, Marscher & Howard, P.A., Hilton Head Island, S.C., for appellant.E. Bart Daniel, United States Attorney, A. Peter Shahid, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, S.C., for appellee.D.S.C.AFFIRMED.Before K.K. HALL, SPROUSE and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.OPINIONPER CURIAM:Samuel J. Campbell appeals his conviction of use of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c). Finding none of the grounds raised on appeal to have merit, we affirm his conviction.William Thomas Whitmire of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division testified at Campbell's trial that he purchased cocaine from Campbell on April 17, 1988, and April 22, 1988. Whitmire stated that at the first buy, Campbell pointed what appeared to be a Browning 9 mm pistol at Whitmire's face. Campbell informed Whitmire that if Whitmire were a police officer, he would "let this [the pistol] do the talking." On April 22, Whitmire wore a body transmitter so that his conversation with Campbell could be recorded. During the conversation, Campbell referenced pointing the gun at Whitmire at their previous meeting. When Campbell was arrested in September 1988, he had in his possession a Browning 9 mm pistol.We find that there was sufficient evidence to convict Campbell. Further, the court did not err when it denied Campbell's motion for mistrial when an officer testified that a pistol and a sawed-off shotgun were discovered in Campbell's truck when he was arrested. The court issued a curative instruction, telling the jury to ignore the mention of the shotgun. Given the overwhelming nature of the evidence against Campbell that already had been introduced and the instruction to the jury, mention of the shotgun played little part, if any, in the jury's verdict. See United States v. Snowden, 770 F.2d 393 (4th Cir.), cert. denied,