Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Reginald Keith HAGEN, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-10-14
Citations: 349 F. App'x 896
Docket Number: No. 07-20798
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Reginald Keith HAGEN, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges, and FELDMAN, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 349
Pages: 896–897

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Reginald Keith HAGEN, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 07-20798.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 14, 2009.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges, and FELDMAN, District Judge.
District Judge, Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
On May 31, 2007, Reginald Keith Hagen was charged with possession of firearms and making false statements or representations to a licensed firearms dealer in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), 924(a)(2), 922(a)(6); 924(a)(2) and 924(a)(1)(A). The government alleged that Hagen had been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, and as a result made a false statement on ATF Form 4473 in order to purchase two firearms.
Hagen moved to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that he was convicted for "assault of a family member" under Texas Penal Code § 22.01(a)(1) and (b)(2) which he argues does not qualify as a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(33)(A). The district court granted the motion. The district court relied on this court's ruling in United States v. Villegas-Hemandez, in deciding to not follow United States v. Shelton. We agree with the district court and AFFIRM the dismissal of the indictment.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
. 468 F.3d 874 (5th Cir.2006).
. 325 F.3d 553 (5th Cir.2003).