United States v. Paul Curry

No. 25-3108 (6th Cir. Mar. 23, 2026) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · March 23, 2026 · No. 25-3108

Summary

The Sixth Circuit affirmed Paul Curry’s convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug-trafficking crime, as well as his sentence. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that Curry preserved his sufficiency challenges despite not renewing his Rule 29 motion after presenting no defense evidence. The court also upheld the admission of recorded jail calls as relevant evidence connecting Curry to the vehicle and supporting the government’s theory of control and intent to distribute.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Julia Smith Gibbons; Eric L. Clay; Whitney D. Hermandorfer
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
March 23, 2026
Docket number
25-3108
Procedural posture
Curry appealed his federal convictions and sentence after a jury convicted him of possessing cocaine with intent to distribute, carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug-trafficking crime, and being a felon in possession of a firearm.
Standard of review
Sufficiency of the evidence is reviewed de novo when preserved; a waived sufficiency challenge is reviewed only for a manifest miscarriage of justice. Admission or exclusion of evidence is reviewed for abuse of discretion, with erroneous admission reviewed for harmless error. Substantive sentence reasonableness is reviewed for abuse of discretion. A district court's denial of a downward departure is generally unreviewable unless the court believed it lacked authority to depart.
Precedential value
Published and recommended for publication under Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b); precedential
Parties
Paul Curry v. United States of America
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedureevidenceappellate procedurestandard of reviewsentencing

Practice areas

Federal criminal lawCriminal procedureEvidenceSentencingAppellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Curry preserved his sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenges by moving for acquittal at the close of the government's case but not expressly renewing the motion after resting without presenting evidence.
  2. Whether sufficient evidence supported Curry's conviction for possessing cocaine with intent to distribute.
  3. Whether sufficient evidence supported Curry's conviction for carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug-trafficking crime.
  4. Whether the district court abused its discretion under the Federal Rules of Evidence by admitting excerpts from Curry's pretrial jail calls.
  5. Whether Curry's within-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable or whether the district court abused its discretion by denying a downward variance.
  6. Whether the district court's denial of a downward departure was reviewable on appeal.

Holdings

  1. A defendant who moves for judgment of acquittal at the close of the government's case does not waive a sufficiency challenge by failing to immediately renew the motion after resting without presenting defense evidence, because the close of the government's case is necessarily the close of all evidence in that circumstance.
  2. The evidence was sufficient to support Curry's conviction for possessing cocaine with intent to distribute.
  3. The evidence was sufficient to support Curry's conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) because a loaded firearm was within reach in the vehicle, near drugs and drug-trafficking equipment, and therefore was carried during and in relation to the drug-trafficking offense.
  4. The district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting excerpts from Curry's jail calls because the calls were relevant to showing his control over the vehicle and their probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
  5. Curry's 154-month, within-Guidelines sentence was not substantively unreasonable, and the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying a downward variance based on Curry's health conditions.
  6. The district court's denial of Curry's request for a downward departure was unreviewable because nothing in the record indicated that the court believed it lacked authority to depart.

Key quotations

Accordingly, and without addressing how preservation rules might apply in distinct factual contexts, we hold that Curry did not waive his sufficiency claims by failing to immediately renew his Rule 29 motion after declining to present any defense evidence because the “close of all of the evidence” necessarily occurred once the government rested. (8)
To “carry” a firearm under § 924(c), “the firearm must be on the person or accompanying the person, as when a ‘person . . . knowingly possesses and conveys firearms in a vehicle . . . .’” (10)
The record does not show that the district court ignored Curry’s health; it simply determined that other sentencing factors carried more weight, as it was entitled to do. (15)

Factual background

Police responding to a welfare check found Curry unconscious in the driver's seat of a Dodge Durango, with a loaded Glock handgun and drum magazine in the center console. Officers also found approximately one ounce of cocaine, other controlled substances, a digital scale, packaging materials, cash, and cellphones in the vehicle. Jail calls Curry made after his arrest referred to Cash App cards, money, and ownership or purchase of the vehicle, which was registered to Francine Gill. A jury convicted Curry of cocaine possession with intent to distribute, carrying a firearm during and in relation to drug trafficking, and felon-in-possession of a firearm.

Procedural history

Curry was indicted on six federal counts following his arrest and the discovery of drugs and a firearm in a vehicle. After a jury trial, he was convicted on Counts II, V, and VI and acquitted on Counts I, III, and IV. The district court imposed 154 months' imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Curry appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, admission of jail-call recordings, and substantive reasonableness of his sentence.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…