Background
Jose Alvaro Cervantes, Jr., appealed his conviction for possessing a firearm after a felony conviction in violation of Section eighteen of the United States Code, Section nine hundred twenty-two, subsection G, paragraph one. He argued that the statute violated the Second Amendment and exceeded Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause. Cervantes conceded that these issues were foreclosed by circuit precedent but raised them to preserve the arguments for further review.
The court’s reasoning
The court rejected the facial Second Amendment challenge, noting that it had previously rejected such a challenge in United States versus Diaz. Regarding the as-applied challenge, the court found that the defendant’s prior felony convictions for evading arrest in a vehicle and burglary of a vehicle were valid predicates under the statute. The court cited United States versus Simpson and United States versus Alaniz to support the conclusion that these felonies are valid. The court also found that challenges based on the Commerce Clause were foreclosed by United States versus Alcantar. Because summary disposition was appropriate, the court granted the government’s motion for summary affirmance.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Fifth Circuit’s stance that challenges to Section eighteen of the United States Code, Section nine hundred twenty-two, subsection G, paragraph one, based on the Second Amendment or Commerce Clause are foreclosed by existing precedent. It confirms that convictions for firearm possession by individuals with prior felony convictions for evading arrest or burglary remain valid.