Background
James Mobley appealed his conviction for possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon under 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1). He argued the district court should have dismissed the indictment because the statute is unconstitutional as applied to nonviolent prior convictions under the Supreme Court’s decisions in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen and United States v. Rahimi.
The court’s reasoning
The court noted that Mobley properly conceded his arguments were foreclosed by binding circuit precedent. In United States v. Dubois, the court held that neither Bruen nor Rahimi abrogated the prior decision in United States v. Rozier. Rozier upheld the constitutionality of the statute on the threshold ground that felons are categorically disqualified from exercising their Second Amendment right. The court found that Dubois analyzed both Bruen and Rahimi and concluded that prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons are presumptively lawful. Under the prior-precedent rule, the court was bound by Dubois and Rozier and could not overrule them absent an en banc decision or Supreme Court intervention.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces that the Eleventh Circuit remains bound by its prior decisions upholding felon-in-possession statutes despite recent Supreme Court Second Amendment jurisprudence.