FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT O c t obe r 30, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 17113 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 05 -800 90 -C R -J IC U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s L A V E L L P H I L L I P S , a .k .a . L a v e lle A n tw o n P h illip s , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( O c t ob e r 30, 2006) B efo re T JO F L A T , A N D E R S O N an dB IR C H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: L av el l P h i l l i p s ap p eal s h i s co n v i ct i o n fo r p o ssessi o n o f am m u n i t i o n b y a2

c o n v ic te d f

e lo n , in v io la tio n o f

1 8 U .S .C . § § 9 2 2 ( g ) a n d9 2 4 ( e ) . H e c o n te n d s th a t, u n d e rth e c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f th is c a s e , th e r e w a s n o s u b s ta n tia l n e x u s to in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e b e c au s e h e w a s m e r e lys ta n d in g in ac ityp a rk in g lo t w ith s o m e b u lle ts i n hi s poc ke t . B e c aus e s uc h ne xus di d note xi s t , the di s tr i c tc ourts houl d ha ve gr a nt e d hi s m ot i on f

orj udgm e ntof

a c qui tt a l . H e c ont e nds , m or e ove r , tha tthe G ov ernm ent , i n p roce edi ng w i th h i s prose cut i on , exce eded C on gres s’ C om m er ce C lau s e au th o r ityb e c au s e h is p o s s e s s io n o f b u lle ts w a s n o t a n e c o n o m ic a c tiv ity thatsubst ant i al l y a ff

ec t ed i nt er st at e c om m er ce . H e c i t es U ni t ed S t at es v. L op ez , 5 1 4 U .S . 5 4 9 , 1 1 5 S .C t. 1 6 2 4 , 1 3 1 L .E d .2 d6 2 6 ( 1 9 9 5 ) , to s u p p o rt h is c o n te n tio n . W e r e v ie w th e c o n s titu tio n a lityo f s ta tu te s d e n o v o . U n ite dS ta te s v . S c o tt, 26 3 F . 3d 12 70 , 12 71 (11th C i r. 20 01 ). P ursuantt o the C om m er ce C l ause , as i nt e rpr e t e d byL ope z , C ongr e s s m a ype rm i s s i bl yr e gul a t e ( 1) the us e of the channel s of i nt er st at e c om m er ce ; (2) the i nstrum ent al i t i es of i nt er st at e c om m er ce , or pers on s or thi ng s i n i nt er st at e c om m er ce ; and (3) act i vi t i es w i th a “ subst ant i al r e la tio n to in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e .” L o p e z , 5 1 4 U .S . a t 5 5 8 - 5 9 , 1 1 5 S .C t a t 1 6 2 9 - 3 0 . L o p e z h e ldth a t th e G u n - F r e e S c h o o l Z o n e s A c t, w h ic h m a d e it af e d e r a l o f f e n s e to know i ngl ypos s e s s af

i r e a rm i n as c hool z one , w a s a n unc ons t i tut i ona l e xe r c i s e of C o n g r e s s io n a l au th o r ityb e c au s e “[ t]h e a c t n e ith e rr e g u la te s ac o m m e r c ia l a c tiv ity n o rc o n ta in s ar e q u ir e m e n t th a t th e p o s s e s s io n b e c o n n e c te din a n yw a yto3

i nt e r s t a t e c om m e r c e . ” I d. a t551, 115 S . C t . a t1626. T he C ourtf ound i tdi s pos i t i ve thatthe ac tcont ai ned “ no expres s j uri sdi ct i on al el em entw hi ch m i gh tl i m i ti t s r ea ch t o adi s c r e t e s e tof

f i r e a rm pos s e s s i ons tha ta ddi t i ona l l yha ve a n e xpl i c i tc onne c t i on w i th o r e ff

ec ton i nt er st at e c om m er ce . ” I d. at56 2, 11 5 S . C t . at16 26 . In U ni t ed S t a t e s v. M c A l l i s t e r , 77 F . 3d 387, 390 ( 11th C i r . 1996) , w e uphe l d § 922( g) ( 1) a ga i ns tac ons t i tut i ona l c ha l l e nge ba s e d on the r e a s oni ng i n L ope z . S e c t i on 9 2 2 (g )(1 ) p ro v i d es: Itshal l be un l aw ful for any pers on –(1) w ho has bee n con vi ct ed i n any court o f , ac r im e p u n is h ab le b yim p r is o n m e n t f o rate rm e x c e e d in g o n e y e a r. . . to s hi p ortr a ns porti n i nt e r s t a t e orf or e i gn c om m e r c e , orpos s e s s i n ora f f e c t i ng c om m e r c e , a nyf

i r e a rm ora m m uni t i on; ort o r e c e i ve a nyf i r e a rm or a m m uni t i on w hi c h ha s be e n s hi ppe d ortr a ns port e d i n i nt e r s t a t e orf or e i gn c o m m e r c e . 18 U . S . C . § 9 22 (g). W e hel d thatthe st atut e had a j uri sdi ct i on el em ent , so i tw as f a c i a l l yva l i d, a nd tha tM c A l l i s t e r ’ s a s appl i e d c ha l l e nge f a i l e d “ [ b] e c aus e the g o v e rn m e n t d e m o n s tr a te d th a t th e f ir e a rm p o s s e s s e db yM c A llis te rp r e v io u s ly tr a v e le d in in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e .” M c A llis te r , 7 7 F .3 da t 3 9 0 . I n f in d in g th is st atut e f ac i al l y c on st i tut i on al , w e r ea soned that , un l i ke the G un -F re e S choo l Z on es A ctati ss ue i n L op ez , the fe l on -i n-po ss es si on st atut e has an expres s j uri sdi ct i on al e le m e n t, w h ic h w o u ld“e n s u r e ” th a t th e f ir e a rm p o s s e s s io n in q u e s tio n a f f e c ts in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e . I d . a t 3 8 9 - 9 0 n . 4 . W e h a v e a ls o h e ldth a t n o th in g in S up re m e C ou rtprec edentdeci ded aft erL op ez “ al t er s the re as on i ng up on w hi ch4

M c A llis te ris m o o r e d .” S e e S c o tt, 2 6 3 F .3 da t 1 2 7 3 - 7 4 . M c A llis te rr e m a in s g o o d la w , a s it h a s n o t b e e n o v e rru le do rc a lle din to q u est i o n b y su b seq u en tS u p rem e C o u rtd eci si o n s. W e th erefo re rej ectas m eri t l ess P h illip s ’s C o m m e r c e C lau s e c h a lle n g e . N e x t, P h illip s c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e din o v e rru lin g h is obj ec t i on s t o thi s c i rc ui t ’ s patt ern j ury i nstruct i on re gardi ng i nt er st at e c om m er ce , a n d b ya d v is in g th e ju ryth a t a ll th a t w a s n e c e s s a ryto s u s ta in th e in te r s ta te com m er ce as pectof the charged offe nse w as proo f thatthe am m un i t i on had o nce m ov ed i n i nt er st at e c om m er ce . H e s ay s thatthe i nstruct i on gi ven t o the j ury c ons t i tut e d aj udgm e ntof gui l ton one e l e m e ntof the of f e ns e tha tthe G ove rnm e nt w a s r e qui r e d t o pr ove i n a c c or da nc e w i th A ppr e ndi v. N e w J e r s e y , 530 U . S . 466, 1 2 0 S. Ct . 2 3 4 8 , 1 4 7 L. Ed . 2 d 4 3 5 ( 2 0 0 0 ) , a n dBl a k e l yv . W a s h i n g t o n , 5 4 2 U . S. 2 9 6 , 1 2 4 S .C t. 2 5 3 1 , 1 5 9 L .E d .2 d4 0 3 ( 2 0 0 4 ) . W e p e r f o rm ad e n o v o r e v ie w o f ju ryin s tru c tio n s w h e n th e o b je c tin g p a rty c l a i m s tha tpr e

j udi c e w a s c aus e d byi ns truc t i ons tha te i the rm i s s t a t e d the l a w or m i sl ed the j ury. U ni t ed S t at es v. B ender, 29 0 F . 3d 12 79 , 12 84 (11th C i r. 20 02 ). In det erm i ni ng w hether the gi ven i nstruct i on s r ef l ec t ed the l aw ac cura t el y, w e a ff ord the di s tr i c tc ourtw i de di s c r e t i on a s t o the s ty l e a nd w or di ng e m pl oy e d i n the in stru ctio n s. Id . W e r ev iew ju ry in stru ctio n s to d eter m in e w h eth erth e c o u rt’s5

char ge, “ consi dere d as aw ho l e, suff i ci ent l y i nstruct s the j ury s o thatthe j urors unde r s t a nd the i s s ue s i nvol ve d a nd a r e notm i s l e d. ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S hor e s , 966 F . 2d 13 83 , 13 86 (11th C i r. 19 92 ). T o pr ove avi ol a t i on of § 922( g) ( 1) , the gove rnm e ntm us tpr ove , be y ond a r e a s o n ab le d o u b t, th a t ( 1 ) th e d e f e n d a n t w a s ac o n v ic te df e lo n w h o ( 2 ) k n o w in g ly p o s s e s s e d af

ir e a rm , a n d ( 3 ) th e f

ir e a rm w a s in o ra f

f e c tin g in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e . U ni t ed S t at es v. D el eveaux , 20 5 F . 3d 12 92 , 12 96 -97 (11 th C i r. 20 00 ). P hi l l i ps’ s j ury i nstruct i on chal l enge i s m er i t l es s bec ause the di stri ctcourt corr ec t l y s t at ed the l aw . T he courti nstruct ed the j ury that , t o con vi ctP hi l l i ps, they ha d t o f i nd, be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubt , tha the w a s ac onvi c t e d f e l on w ho

“ know i ngl ypos s e s s e d a nya m m uni t i on i n ora f f e c t i ng i nt e r s t a t e c om m e r c e . ” T he c ourtf urthe ra dvi s e d the j urytha t“ i nt e r s t a t e c om m e r c e ” i nc l ude d m ove m e ntof a m m uni t i on f

r om one s t a t e t o a nothe r , a nd tha tP hi l l i ps ne e d notha ve know n of the m o v e m e n t o f

a m m u n itio n in in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e . T h is in s tru c tio n w a s a n a c c u r a te st at em entof the l aw . M oreover, P hi l l i ps’ s c l ai m thatthe i nstruct i on vi ol at ed A ppr e ndi a nd B l a ke l yi s m e r i t l e s s be c aus e he s t i pul a t e d tha tthe e l e m e ntr e qui r i ng ane xus t o i nt e r s t a t e c om m e r c e ha d be e n s a t i s f i e d, s o the j urydi d notha ve t o f i nd thi s f a c t . T he pa tt e rn j uryi ns truc t i on w a s ac orr e c ts t a t e m e ntof the l a w , a nd the d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lya d v is e d th e ju rys o th a t th e yu n d e r s to o dth e is s u e s in v o lv e d .6

F o r th e fo reg o i n g reaso n s, P h i l l i p ’ s co n v i ct i o n i s A F F I R M E D .