the offense from the other state for which the defendant was convicted does not necessarily include conduct considered to be a felony under Louisiana law, that conviction cannot be used to enhance a subsequent felony under the habitual offender statute.”). We do not accept defendant’s argument. As it concerns control over stolen goods, the federal crime of transporting stolen goods has two routes to committing a violation. A person can either cause the goods to be transported or can transport the goods himself. See Pereira, 347 U.S. at 8, 74 S.Ct. 358. Under Louisiana law, if the defendant transports stolen goods himself, he has necessarily possessed them. Cf. State v. Pierce, 11-0095 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/28/12), 89 So.3d 1, 8 (on reh’g), writ denied, 12-0860 (La.10/12/12), 99 So.3d 38 (<HOLDING>). Here, it was necessary for the trial court to
holding that evidence that defendant was sitting in the drivers seat of the ear which was not running and held keys to trunk in his hand did not rise to the level of actual physical control necessary to support a conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol holding that a defendant exercised control over a firearm that was found in a vehicle he was driving holding that exclusive possession of recently stolen goods warrants the inference that he stole all of the property for which the defendant is accused of taking provided all the property was stolen at the same time emphasis added holding that the defendant possessed a stolen automobile in which he was found sitting not even driving holding that defendants state court conviction for possessing a stolen car was severable from federal offense of being a felon in possession of a firearm even though firearm was found in cars trunk at time of defendants arrest for state stolen vehicle charge