No. 24-1640 ___________________________

United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Quincy Martez Chambers

Defendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central ____________

Submitted: January 15, 2025 Filed: April 4, 2025 ____________ Before SMITH, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ BENTON, Circuit Judge.

A jury convicted Quincy Martez Chambers for possession of ammunition by a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e). The district court 1

1 The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. sentenced him to 360 months in prison. Chambers appeals his conviction and sentence. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

I.

Nairobi Anderson, the mother of Chambers’s child, was shot in the chest and struck in the head with the gun by a man wearing a ski mask. After Anderson and the child took cover, more shots were fired. On the theory that Chambers committed the shooting, a jury convicted him for possessing ammunition as a felon under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).

At sentencing, the district court found the object of Chambers’s offense was first degree murder, making the base offense level 33. It applied a three-point enhancement for Anderson’s injuries, and a three-point enhancement for obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. §§ 2A2.1(b)(1) and 3C1.1, respectively. Finding Chambers to be an Armed Career Criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), the district court applied the statutory range of 15 years to life. It sentenced Chambers to 360 months in prison.

II.

Chambers claims the evidence insufficiently proves he shot Anderson and, therefore, that he possessed ammunition. This court reviews de novo the sufficiency of the evidence. United States v. Johnson, 745 F.3d 866, 868–69 (8th Cir. 2014). “We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the guilty verdict, granting all reasonable inferences that are supported by that evidence.” Id. at 869. “We will reverse a conviction only if no reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. “[I]t is within the province of the jury to make credibility assessments and resolve conflicting testimony.” United States v. Torres, 552 F.3d 743, 747 (8th Cir. 2009). A jury’s credibility determinations are “virtually unassailable on appeal.” United States v. Nosley, 62 F.4th 1120, 1130 (8th Cir. 2023). -2- Chambers emphasizes that Anderson recanted her initial identifications of him as the shooter. And defense witnesses testified that Chambers was traveling at the time. But conflicting evidence included: body-camera footage of Anderson’s repeated identifications of Chambers at the scene; multiple witnesses hearing these identifications; a car associated with Chambers fleeing the scene; messages from Chambers saying it won’t “happen” again; and Chambers suggesting marriage to silence Anderson. Viewing the evidence most favorably to the government and deferring to the jury’s credibility determinations, the jury had sufficient evidence to find Chambers committed the shooting.

Chambers challenges as irrelevant and overly prejudicial the admission of text messages and still shots from a video visitation between Anderson and Chambers. This court reviews evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion