Bessicks v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Bessicks’s convictions for possessing a firearm and ammunition as a prohibited person. Although the sufficiency challenge ordinarily receives de novo review, Bessicks’s failure to move for a directed verdict or judgment of acquittal limited review to plain error, and the Court found none because the evidence supported constructive possession. The Court also approved appellate counsel’s withdrawal under Rule 26(c), concluding that the appeal lacked any arguably appealable issue.