Cite as U.S. v. Hommer, No. 96-1681, (8th Cir. 1996)

                               ___________
                               No. 96-1681
                               ___________

      United States of America,    *
                                   *
                 Appellee,         *  Appeal from the United States
                                   *  District Court for the 
       v.                          *  District of Minnesota.
                                   *
      Stephen Matthew Hommer,      *         [UNPUBLISHED]
      also known as Steven         *
      Matthew Hommer,              *
                                   *
                Appellant.         *

                            ___________

                     Submitted:  October 22, 1996

                      Filed:  November 13, 1996
                            ___________

         Before WOLLMAN, BRIGHT, and MAGILL, Circuit Judges.

                             ___________

     PER CURIAM.

     Stephen Hommer appeals his conviction of possessing and
transferring a machine gun in violation of 18 U.S.C. sections
922(o) and 924(a)(2).  Hommer contends that the Government failed
to present sufficient evidence to support the conviction.  Hommer
argues that the Government offered no direct evidence that he test
fired the semi-automatic pistol after grinding down its hammer to
make it fire automatically.  He contends this lack of direct
evidence bars his conviction.  Hommer also contends that evidence
of his earlier assembly of a Sten machine gun constituted improper
evidence of bad acts, not permitted by Rule 404(b) of the Federal
Rules of Evidence.
   
     We reject Hommer's contentions and affirm.  The Government
presented ample circumstantial evidence to the jury establishing
that by grinding down the hammer of a M-11, 9mm pistol, Hommer knew
the weapon would fire automatically.  
   
     Further, the evidence that Hommer constructed Sten machine
guns from kits some years ago indicated the extent of his knowledge
about automatic firing of guns and his awareness that grinding down
the hammer of his pistol would cause it to fire automatically. 
Thus, the district court properly admitted the evidence under Rule
404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
  
     We affirm without an extended opinion.  See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
   
     A true copy.
   
     Attest:
     CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.