Court Opinion

ID: 9407698
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-08 00:01:10.057474+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:39.731725
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11188         Document: 00516813792             Page: 1      Date Filed: 07/07/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-11188
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                                     July 7, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Joseph Michael Easton,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 2:22-CR-56-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Jolly, Jones, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Joseph Michael Easton pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a
   felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He appeals and, relying on
   National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012),
   argues for the first time that § 922(g)(1) exceeds the scope of Congress’s
   power under the Commerce Clause and is therefore unconstitutional. The

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11188      Document: 00516813792            Page: 2    Date Filed: 07/07/2023

                                      No. 22-11188

   Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance and an
   alternative request for an extension of time to file its brief.
          Easton correctly concedes that his arguments challenging the
   constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) are foreclosed. See United States v. Alcantar,
   733 F.3d 143, 145-46 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513,
   518 (5th Cir. 2001); United States v. De Leon, 170 F.3d 494, 499 (5th Cir.
   1999). He raises the arguments to preserve them for further review.
          Because summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp.,
   Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the Government’s motion
   for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an
   extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district
   court is AFFIRMED.

                                           2