Court Opinion

ID: 9949826
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-12 18:00:26.959814+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:34:05.308339
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10228            Document: 71-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/12/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 23-10228
                                  Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                  ____________                                March 12, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Jonathan Jamal Bangash,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:22-CR-11-1
                   ______________________________

Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Defendant-Appellant Jonathan Jamal Bangash appeals his conviction
for illegal receipt of a firearm by a person under indictment, in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 922(n) and 924(a)(1)(D). He argues that (1) § 922(n) violates the
Second Amendment in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in New York
State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022);

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10228        Document: 71-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/12/2024

                                 No. 23-10228

(2) Congress exceeded its powers under the Commerce Clause when it
enacted § 922(n); and (3) because of the above errors, the district court
misadvised him of the nature of his offense and erroneously accepted the
factual basis of his guilty plea, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 11.
       We review Bangash’s first and third claims for plain error because he
did not raise either argument before the district court. See Puckett v. United
States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). He did, however, preserve his Commerce
Clause argument. We review the constitutionality of federal statutes de novo.
United States v. Bailey, 115 F.3d 1222, 1225 (5th Cir. 1997).
       Each of Bangash’s arguments is unavailing. First, any error regarding
whether § 922(n) violates the Second Amendment in light of the Court’s
decision in Bruen was not clear or obvious. See United States v. Jones, 88 F.4th
571, 574 (5th Cir. 2023); United States v. Sanches, 86 F.4th 680, 687 (5th Cir.
2023); United States v. Avila, No. 22-50088, 2022 WL 17832287, at *1–2 (5th
Cir. Dec. 21, 2022) (unpublished), cert. denied, 143 S. Ct. 2512 (2023).
Second, as Bangash himself concedes, his Commerce Clause argument is
unpersuasive. See United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145–46 (5th Cir.
2013). Lastly, given our disposition of the underlying arguments, it follows
that the district court committed no Rule 11 plain error.
       AFFIRMED.

                                       2