United States v. Grady Lee Guard

2 F.3d 1158 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Grady Lee GUARD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 86-5024. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 21, 1993. * Decided Aug. 4, 1993. Before BROWNING, TANG and NORRIS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Grady Lee Guard appeals his conviction, which followed a jury trial, for possessing an unregistered machinegun in violation of 26 U.S.C. Secs. 5861 (d), 5871. Guard claims the evidence was insufficient to show he possessed a machinegun within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 5845 (b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 Evidence is sufficient to support a conviction if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, " 'any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.' " United States v. Mullins, 992 F.2d 1472, 1477 (9th Cir.1993) (quotation omitted).…