Opinion ID: 4574286
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Conviction

Text: The FIP statute prohibits any person from possessing a firearm if that person “[h]as been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year[.]”8 At the time of his arrest, Blocker had four felony convictions: robbery, receiving stolen property (over $1000), unauthorized use of a vehicle, and destruction of property (over $1000). Moreover, Blocker stipulated at trial that he had “previously been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year.” Thereafter, Blocker was convicted of FIP and 7 Malloy v. United States, 186 A.3d 802, 814 (D.C. 2018) (permitting reversal only if there is “[1] ‘error’ that is [2] ‘plain’ (meaning ‘clear’ or ‘obvious’), that [3] ‘affects substantial rights,’ and that, if not corrected, [4] would result in a ‘miscarriage of justice’ (meaning conviction of an innocent defendant) or otherwise would ‘seriously affect[ ] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.’” (quoting Wooden v. United States, 6 A.3d 833, 834 n.5 (D.C. 2010) (brackets in original)). 8 § 22-4503(a)(1). 6 received an enhanced forty-month sentence based on his prior robbery conviction9 then pending on appeal. Approximately six months after he was sentenced in this case, we reversed his robbery conviction. 10 Blocker asks for reversal of his FIP conviction because the trial court used his robbery conviction to enhance his sentence, despite the fact that his robbery conviction, still pending appeal, was not final. The FIP statute, D.C. Code § 224503(a)(1), prohibits a person from possessing a firearm if that individual “[h]as been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year”; 11 it does not require prior conviction of a crime of violence, such as robbery. Putting aside his robbery conviction, we note that Blocker had been convicted of three non-violent felonies, each of which could have been used to meet the FIP requirement of a prior felony conviction. Moreover, the indictment itself does not specify that Blocker had been convicted of a violent felony; it stated 9 See infra Section II.B. 10 Blocker, et. al. v. United States, No. 16-CF-388, Mem. Op. & J. (D.C. Aug. 21, 2018). 11 § 22-4503 (a)(1) (emphasis added). 7 only that he had been convicted of “a crime.”12 Finally, the jury did not know that Blocker had been convicted of a robbery; it knew only that he had stipulated to conviction of “a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year.” Accordingly, because any of Blocker’s other three felonies would have satisfied the FIP requirement, the fact that his robbery conviction was reversed does not change the ultimate outcome; Blocker was not erroneously convicted of FIP — given that his sentence had not otherwise been contested at trial.