United States v. Arthur Lee Veal

9 F.3d 1555 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Arthur Lee VEAL, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50710. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 20, 1993. * Decided Oct. 26, 1993. Before: BEEZER, KOZINSKI, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Arthur Lee Veal appeals his conviction following a bench trial for possession of an unregistered firearm in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (d). Veal contends that the district court erred by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. Veal argues that (1) the evidence was not sufficient to prove he knew he possessed a firearm that was subject to regulation, and (2) even if he did know that the firearm was subject to regulation, he should have been afforded a reasonable opportunity to register the firearm. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 When reviewing a motion for judgment of acquittal challenging…