Court Opinion

ID: 9918368
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-12 19:00:30.633389+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:02:42.898491
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10649       Document: 00517031252             Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/12/2024

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

                                     No. 23-10649
                                                                                    FILED
                                                                             January 12, 2024
                                   Summary Calendar
                                   ____________                                Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                    Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                           versus

   Leroy Hoyle,

                                             Defendant—Appellant.
                    ______________________________

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:21-CR-641-1
                    ______________________________

   Before Jones, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Leroy Hoyle pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted
   felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He argues for the first time on
   appeal that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment and exceeds
   Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause.

           _____________________
          *
              Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 23-10649      Document: 00517031252           Page: 2    Date Filed: 01/12/2024

                                     No. 23-10649

          Because Hoyle did not raise his constitutional arguments in the
   district court, our review is limited to plain error. See United States v.
   Howard, 766 F.3d 414, 419 (5th Cir. 2014). To prevail on plain error review,
   Hoyle must show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his
   substantial rights. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009)
   (citations omitted). If he makes such a showing, this court has the discretion
   to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or
   public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id.
          Hoyle’s Second Amendment argument is based on New York State
   Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). However, such a plain error
   challenge to § 922(g)(1) is unavailing because, given the current state of the
   caselaw, it is not clear or obvious that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional. See
   United States v. Jones, 88 F.4th 571, at 573–74 (5th Cir. 2023).
          Last, Hoyle asserts that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional because it
   exceeds Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.               We have
   consistently upheld the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) and have labeled this
   statute “a valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce
   Clause.” United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145 (5th Cir. 2013).
          AFFIRMED.

                                          2