Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02536/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02536-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Brian Michael Blake
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2536

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Arkansas.

Brian Michael Blake, * 

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 11, 2005

Filed: January 19, 2005

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________

FAGG, Circuit Judge.

Over the course of three days, Brian Michael Blake purchased eleven handguns

and six rifles from five separate federal firearms licensee dealers on behalf of others

who provided the money for the guns. Blake knew the guns would be resold on the

black market in another state, but agreed to buy the guns for the other men in

exchange for “some quick money.” At each location, Blake signed an ATF form

4473 representing that he was “the actual buyer of the firearm.” The form signed by

Blake warned, “Any individual who is not buying the firearm for himself . . . or as a

gift, but completes this form violates the law.” The form also contained an example

stating, “Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith

Appellate Case: 04-2536 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/19/2005 Entry ID: 1856581 
*

The Honorable George Howard, Jr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas. 

-2-

gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. If Mr. Jones fills out this form, he will

violate the law.” Some of the guns bought by Blake were recovered by law

enforcement in drug arrests, drug-related consensual searches, a gang-related seizure,

and a shooting. 

After the Government charged Blake with making a false statement to a

federally licensed firearms dealer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6), Blake filed

a motion to dismiss the indictment. The district court*

 denied the motion, holding the

statute was not unconstitutionally vague and Blake’s “straw purchase” clearly

violated the statute, relying on United States v. Moore, 109 F.3d 1456, 1460-63 (9th

Cir. 1997), and United States v. Nelson, 221 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2000).

Following the district court’s denial, Blake pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five

years of probation. Blake now appeals asserting the indictment failed to charge a

crime because he could reasonably believe he was answering truthfully when he listed

himself on the ATF form as the actual buyer. 

Having carefully considered the briefs, the record, and the applicable law, we

conclude the district court thoroughly analyzed Blake’s assertion and properly

rejected it. Because we have nothing to add to the district court’s explanation, we

affirm on the basis of the district court’s order. We note Blake states he is not

pursuing a claim under Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2536 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/19/2005 Entry ID: 1856581