Court Opinion

ID: 9434877
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 00:00:30.513752+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:11.213274
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11246         Document: 00516843663             Page: 1      Date Filed: 08/02/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-11246
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                                 August 2, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Leopoldo Ramirez-Moreno,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-258-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Jones, Smith, and Dennis, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Leopoldo Ramirez-Moreno pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea
   agreement, to one count of possession of a firearm by an alien illegally present
   in the United States after removal, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5). He
   appeals and, relying on National Federation of Independent Business et al. v.
   Sebelius et al., 567 U.S. 519 (2012), argues for the first time that § 922(g)

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11246      Document: 00516843663          Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/02/2023

                                    No. 22-11246

   exceeds the scope of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and is
   thus unconstitutional. The Government has filed an unopposed motion for
   summary affirmance and an alternative request for an extension of time to file
   its brief.
           Ramirez-Moreno correctly concedes that his arguments challenging
   the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) are foreclosed. See United States v.
   Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145-46 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Daugherty, 264
   F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001); United States v. De Leon, 170 F.3d 494, 499 (5th
   Cir. 1999). He raises the arguments to preserve them for further review.
           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, the alternative motion for an
   extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district
   court is AFFIRMED.

                                         2