Court Opinion

ID: 9939779
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-12 19:00:34.16957+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:41:58.903399
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10138        Document: 00517062277             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/12/2024

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                     ____________                                           FILED
                                                                                     February 12, 2024
                                       No. 23-10138                                    Lyle W. Cayce
                                     ____________                                           Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Kristopher Lee Rocco,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:22-CR-261-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Elrod, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         Federal law bars convicted felons from possessing firearms. See
   18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Kristopher Rocco, a convicted felon, pled guilty of
   violating § 922(g)(1) by possessing numerous firearms. He was sentenced to
   33 months imprisonment.
         On appeal, Rocco argues the district court erred in three ways by
   accepting his guilty plea. His arguments are all squarely foreclosed by our

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10138        Document: 00517062277       Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/12/2024

                                   No. 23-10138

   precedent, however. First, Rocco contends there was an insufficient factual
   basis for his plea because § 922(g)(1)’s “in or affecting commerce” element,
   when “[c]orrectly interpreted,” requires more than the mere past movement
   of his firearms in interstate commerce. But, as he acknowledges, our
   precedent holds otherwise. See United States v. Rawls, 85 F.3d 240, 242 (5th
   Cir. 1996).
            Next, Rocco argues that § 922(g)(1) exceeds Congress’s authority
   under the Commerce Clause and that the district court erred by failing to
   advise him of that fact. Rocco admits, however, that this challenge is also
   foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145
   (5th Cir. 2013).
            Finally, Rocco contends that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second
   Amendment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1
   (2022), and that the district court erred by failing to inform him of its
   unconstitutionality. But, as he concedes, our review is for plain error. And,
   in a recently published opinion, we held that § 922(g)(1) is not clearly or
   obviously unconstitutional under Bruen. See United States v. Jones, 88 F.4th
   571, 573–74 (5th Cir. 2023). Therefore, Rocco cannot demonstrate plain
   error.
                                                                AFFIRMED.

                                        2