Court Opinion

ID: 9931295
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-08 19:01:17.596255+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:18:02.255966
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11239         Document: 00517059966             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/08/2024

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                                    FILED
                                                                                February 8, 2024
                                        No. 22-11239
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                      ____________                                    Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Hector Patricio Galvan,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 2:22-CR-48-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Richman, Chief Judge, and Graves and Wilson, Circuit
   Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Hector Patricio Galvan appeals his guilty-plea conviction for
   possession of a firearm after a felony conviction in violation of 18 U.S.C.
   § 922(g)(1). He argues § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional and the factual basis
   for his conviction was insufficient. We affirm.

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11239         Document: 00517059966           Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/08/2024

                                        No. 22-11239

                                                I
          Galvan pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to
   possession of a firearm after a felony conviction in violation of 18
   U.S.C.§ 922(g)(1). He stipulated that he knowingly possessed a firearm, that
   he knew he had been convicted of a felony, and that the firearm traveled in
   interstate commerce. As part of the plea agreement, he waived his right to
   appeal or collaterally attack his conviction except to (1) directly appeal a
   sentence exceeding the statutory maximum or resulting from an arithmetic
   error, (2) challenge the voluntariness of the plea or the appeal waiver, and
   (3) bring an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The district court
   sentenced Galvan to twenty-four months of imprisonment and three years of
   supervised release. Galvan timely appealed. 1
                                                II
          Galvan advances three arguments to contend his guilty-plea
   conviction is invalid. First, he argues § 922(g)(1) requires more than a
   firearm’s past movement in commerce to show the requisite interstate nexus.
   Second, he argues § 922(g)(1) exceeds Congress’s authority under the
   Commerce Clause. Third, he argues that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second
   Amendment under the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle &
   Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen. 2 Galvan concedes he did not raise these challenges
   in the district court and our review is for plain error.

          _____________________
          1
              See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A).
          2
              597 U.S. 1 (2022).

                                                2
Case: 22-11239           Document: 00517059966               Page: 3      Date Filed: 02/08/2024

                                             No. 22-11239

           The Government argues that Galvan waived his right to make these
   plain-error challenges under the terms of his appeal waiver. Because Galvan
   is unable to prevail on the merits, we decline to address this issue. 3
           Galvan’s first two arguments are foreclosed by our precedent. First,
   we have clearly held the “‘in or affecting commerce’ element [of § 922(g)(1)]
   can be satisfied if the firearm possessed by a convicted felon had previously
   traveled in interstate commerce.” 4 Second, “we have consistently upheld
   the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1)” in light of arguments that “§ 922(g)(1)
   exceeds Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.” 5 Accordingly,
   we reject these arguments.
           Galvan’s Second-Amendment challenge to § 922(g)(1) similarly fails
   to establish pain error. “Plain error is ‘clear’ or ‘obvious’ error that affects
   ‘substantial rights’ of the defendant and ‘seriously affects the fairness,
   integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.’” 6 To establish plain
   error, Galvan “must identify (1) a forfeited error (2) that is clear or obvious,
   rather than subject to reasonable dispute, and (3) that affects his substantial
   rights.” 7 “If he satisfies these three requirements, we may correct the error

           _____________________
           3
             See United States v. Smith, No. 22-10795, 2023 WL 5814936, at *2 (5th Cir. Sept.
   8, 2023) (per curiam) (unpublished) (electing to evaluate the defendant’s “argument[s] on
   the merits” despite the Government’s “compelling argument regarding the applicability
   of [the defendant’s] appeal waiver”).
           4
             United States v. Rawls, 85 F.3d 240, 242 (5th Cir. 1996) (citing United States v.
   Fitzhugh, 984 F.2d 143, 146 (5th Cir. 1993) and Scarborough v. United States, 431 U.S. 563,
   575 (1977)).
           5
               United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145 (5th Cir. 2013).
           6
             United States v. Sanchez, 325 F.3d 600, 603 (5th Cir. 2003) (quoting United States
   v. Saenz, 134 F.3d 697, 701 (5th Cir. 1998)).
           7
             United States v. Trujillo, 4 F.4th 287, 290 (5th Cir. 2021) (citing Puckett v. United
   States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009)).

                                                   3
Case: 22-11239            Document: 00517059966                Page: 4   Date Filed: 02/08/2024

                                                No. 22-11239

   at our discretion if it ‘seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity, or public
   reputation of judicial proceedings.’” 8 A “lack of binding authority is often
   dispositive in the plain error context.” 9 “An error is not plain ‘unless the
   error is clear under current law.’” 10 Because there is no binding precedent
   holding § 922(g)(1) unconstitutional and it is not clear that Bruen dictates
   such a conclusion, Galvan is unable to demonstrate an error that is clear or
   obvious. 11 Accordingly, the district court did not plainly err by accepting
   Galvan’s guilty plea.
                                            *        *         *
           We AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.

           _____________________
           8
                Id. (quoting Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135).
           9
             United States v. McGavitt, 28 F.4th 571, 577 (5th Cir. 2022) (internal quotation
   marks omitted) (quoting United States v. Gonzalez, 792 F.3d 534, 538 (5th Cir. 2015)), cert.
   denied, 143 S. Ct. 282 (2022).
           10
              United States v. Bishop, 603 F.3d 279, 281 (5th Cir. 2010) (quoting United States
   v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 734 (1993)).
           11
             See United States v. Rodriguez-Parra, 581 F.3d 227, 230-31 (5th Cir. 2009); see also
   United States v. Smith, No. 22-10795, 2023 WL 5814936, at *3 (5th Cir. Sept. 8, 2023) (per
   curiam) (unpublished) (holding defendant failed to establish plain error when challenging
   constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) under Bruen “given the lack of binding authority deeming
   § 922(g)(1) unconstitutional”).

                                                     4