and leg, and that he fired shots at Rosado’s wife when she was driving Rosado’s truck. The testimony of these witnesses provides sufficient evidence to support Smith’s firearm conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Hoffman also argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. Hoffman did not file a Rule 29 motion on this issue and we review for plain error. Powell, 113 F.3d at 466-67. Hoffman argues that there was insufficient evidence to find that he was in possession of the firearm found in the console of his truck after he was arrested for running a red light because it was not within his control. Hoffman’s argument is without merit. See New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, 460, 101 S.Ct. 2860, 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981) (<HOLDING>). It follows that none of Hoffman’s contentions
holding that if firearm is in passenger compartment of vehicle and is accessible it is within control of driver holding that after making an arrest of the driver of a vehicle the police may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle holding that search of golf bag was not legal as search incident to arrest because it was not in passenger compartment of vehicle or otherwise within arrestees immediate control recognizing that permissive search of car compartment incident to arrest is based on the fact that compartment is within reach of the arrestee holding police incident to arrest of occupant of automobile may search entire passenger compartment of vehicle