Court Opinion

ID: 9353012
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-10 19:00:49.24781+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:06:32.970084
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-10619         Document: 00516604161           Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/10/2023

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

                                                                                    FILED
                                      No. 22-10619                           January 10, 2023
                                    Summary Calendar
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                    Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Brian Marc Fraser,

                                                                Defendant—Appellant.

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 3:18-CR-575-1

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Brian Marc Fraser appeals his conviction and sentence for possession
   of a firearm by a convicted felon, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Fraser
   challenges the calculation of his base offense level on grounds that his
   convictions      for    the   Texas     offenses     of   simple    robbery        under
   Texas Penal Code § 29.02 and aggravated robbery under Texas Penal Code

          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-10619       Document: 00516604161               Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/10/2023

                                          No. 22-10619

   § 29.03 are not crimes of violence for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 and
   U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a). Also, for the first time on appeal, Fraser contends that
   § 922(g)(1) is an unconstitutional exercise of power under the Commerce
   Clause and, alternatively, that it should be construed to require either
   relatively recent movement of a firearm across state lines or movement in
   commerce as a consequence of the defendant’s conduct. While Fraser
   acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed, he nevertheless seeks to
   preserve them for possible Supreme Court review. The Government has
   moved without opposition for summary affirmance or, alternatively, for an
   extension of time to file its brief.
           As Fraser correctly concedes, his arguments are foreclosed with
   respect to § 922(g)(1), see United States v. Perryman, 965 F.3d 424, 426 (5th
   Cir. 2020); United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145-46 (5th Cir. 2013),
   and with respect to the characterization of his robbery convictions as crimes
   of violence under § 4B1.2(a)(2), see United States v. Adair, 16 F.4th 469, 470-
   71 (5th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1215 (2022). Because summary
   affirmance 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, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The
   Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED as
   moot.

                                               2