## Facts

- On July 10, 2011, Karol Ray McAtee drove a rented silver Chevrolet Malibu to a United States Border Patrol checkpoint near Falfurrias, Texas, shortly after midnight.
- While a Border Patrol agent questioned McAtee in the primary lane, a canine handler conducted an exterior drug-detection “air sniff,” and the dog alerted to the vehicle.
- McAtee agreed to further inspection and drove to secondary inspection, exited the car, and shut the driver’s door.
- The dog again alerted, including at the driver’s-side door.
- When the canine handler opened the driver’s door, he immediately saw a small red plastic bag on the floor in front of the driver’s seat; it was plainly visible and not hidden under the seat or pedals.
- The agent opened the red bag and found a crystal-like substance; McAtee was arrested.
- An inventory of the vehicle revealed many personal items associated with McAtee (including clothing and toiletries in duffel bags, pillows, blankets, hearing aids, and an empty aquarium).
- Agents also found a pipe in a black plastic case in the center console next to McAtee’s spare hearing aid.
- Testing identified the substance as methamphetamine weighing approximately 0.52 gram; the pipe was not tested for residue, and no fingerprints were recovered from the bag or pipe.
- McAtee told an investigator that no one else had access to or had driven the rental car since he rented it.
- McAtee, who had two prior drug possession convictions, was charged with simple possession under 21 U.S.C. § 844(a), with the government seeking a higher statutory maximum through an information under 21 U.S.C. § 851.
- A jury found McAtee guilty. The district court imposed time served (six months and eight days) and a $100 special assessment.

## Issues

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that McAtee knowingly possessed the methamphetamine found in the rental car (constructive possession).
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 by admitting evidence of the pipe found in the center console.
3. Whether increasing the statutory maximum based on prior convictions identified in a § 851 information violated Apprendi because those convictions were not submitted to the jury.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed McAtee’s conviction and sentence.
- The court held the evidence permitted a rational jury to find knowing, constructive possession, relying on McAtee’s control of the rental vehicle, his statement that no one else had access to it, and the methamphetamine’s plainly visible location at the driver’s feet.
- The court held the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the pipe; it was relevant to knowledge and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
- The court rejected McAtee’s Apprendi argument, holding that the fact of a prior conviction may be found by the judge and used to increase the statutory maximum under the prior-conviction exception.

## Legal Principles

- On sufficiency review, the appellate court asks whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational jury could find the offense elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Constructive possession may be proved by showing ownership, dominion, or control over contraband, or dominion or control over the premises or vehicle where the contraband is found, together with evidence supporting knowledge.
- Evidence of drug paraphernalia may be admissible to show knowledge in a possession case; Rule 403 permits exclusion only when unfair prejudice substantially outweighs probative value, and the ruling is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Under Apprendi and Almendarez-Torres, the existence of prior convictions may be used to raise the statutory maximum without being alleged in the indictment or proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit held that the methamphetamine’s open placement on the driver’s floorboard, combined with McAtee’s dominion over the rental car and his statement that no one else had access to it, was enough for the jury to find knowing possession; it also upheld admission of the pipe as relevant to knowledge and held that prior convictions could lawfully be used to increase the statutory maximum without jury findings.


United States v. McAtee, 538 F. App’x 414 (2013)