Anthony J. Gobert has appealed his jury conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He contends that the evidence introduced to prove his guilt was insufficient. We review this question for a manifest miscarriage of justice because Gobert failed to renew his motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence. See United States v. Avants, 367 F.3d 433, 449 (5th Cir.2004). Under that standard, Gobert must show that the record is “de*463void of evidence of guilt” or that the evidence is “so tenuous that a conviction is shocking.” Avants, 367 F.3d at 449.
Gobert contends only that the Government failed to prove that he was in possession of a firearm. See United States v. Guidry, 406 F.3d 314, 318 (5th Cir.2005) (listing elements of offense); 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Gobert was observed by an acquaintance in possession of a firearm. Accordingly, there was direct evidence that Gobert possessed a firearm and the record was not “devoid of evidence” as to that element of the offense. See Avants, 367 F.3d at 449; United States v. Munoz, 150 F.3d 401, 416 (5th Cir.1998). The conviction is
AFFIRMED.