Bo Hostettler was indicted for possessing a firearm as a felon, violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), after he absconded during supervised release and was found with a gun. Hostettler moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing the statute was unconstitutional under the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen. The district court granted the motion, ruling that the government failed to justify the restriction on Hostettler's Second Amendment rights. The government appealed, and while the appeal was pending, the Sixth Circuit issued new precedent in United States v. Williams clarifying the legal standard for such challenges. Hostettler requested a remand to apply the new standard, but the Sixth Circuit initially declined, proceeding to hear the appeal on the existing record.
The Sixth Circuit held that the district court's decision could not stand because it relied on an outdated legal framework. Under the current precedent established in United States v. Williams, the burden of proof in an as-applied Second Amendment challenge rests with the defendant to demonstrate they do not fit the class of dangerous people who may be disarmed. The district court had incorrectly placed this burden on the government and limited its review to Hostettler's felony record, ignoring his misdemeanor convictions for assault and domestic violence. The court explained that determining dangerousness requires a fact-specific inquiry into the unique circumstances of all past convictions, including details not present in the limited criminal history report before the appellate court. The Sixth Circuit rejected the government's argument that the record was conclusive enough to reinstate the indictment without further proceedings, noting that the absence of specific details about the underlying offenses prevented a final determination of dangerousness.
The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to apply the correct legal standard from United States v. Williams. The district court must now conduct a fact-specific inquiry into Hostettler's dangerousness, considering his entire criminal history and the specific circumstances of his offenses. Hostettler will have a reasonable opportunity to present evidence showing he does not fit the class of dangerous people, and the government cannot simply rely on the existence of his prior convictions without addressing the individualized assessment required by the Second Amendment.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download