Court Opinion

ID: 9911917
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-21 01:02:12.722348+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:58:02.467320
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30382        Document: 00517009513             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/20/2023

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

                                                                                      FILED
                                      No. 23-30382                            December 20, 2023
                                     ____________
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                      Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Fredarius D. Jackson,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Louisiana
                              USDC No. 5:22-CR-168-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Fredarius D. Jackson pleaded guilty to a one-count indictment
   charging him with possessing firearms and ammunition as a convicted felon
   in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He was sentenced to sixty months in
   prison and a three-year term of supervised release. He timely appealed. Fed.
   R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i) (providing 14 days to appeal from the date of entry
   of the judgment). As he concedes, he did not preserve his arguments on

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30382      Document: 00517009513           Page: 2     Date Filed: 12/20/2023

                                     No. 23-30382

   appeal in the district court. Thus, our review is for plain error only. See United
   States v. Howard, 766 F.3d 414, 419 (5th Cir. 2014) (reviewing an unpreserved
   constitutional challenge to a federal statute for plain error). To demonstrate
   plain error, Jackson must show a clear or obvious error that affected his
   substantial rights. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If he
   does so, this court may correct the error but should do so only if it “seriously
   affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id.
   (internal quotation marks, brackets, and citation omitted).
          Jackson argues that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment in
   light of the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n,
   Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), which set forth a new test for assessing the
   constitutionality of a statute under the Second Amendment, and that the
   district court’s failure to advise him of its unconstitutionality violated
   Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The Bruen Court stated that “[w]hen
   the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the
   Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.” 597 U.S. at 24. “The
   government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is
   consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Id. at
   2130. Only if the Government meets its burden “may a court conclude that
   the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s unqualified
   command.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
          Before Bruen, this court held that § 922(g)(1) does not violate the
   Second Amendment. See, e.g., United States v. Darrington, 351 F.3d 632, 633-
   34 (5th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted). And in his concurring opinion in Bruen,
   Justice Kavanaugh—quoting District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570,
   626–27 (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742, 786 (2010)—stated:
   “[N]othing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding
   prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill.”
   Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2162 (Kavanaugh, J., concurring).

                                           2
Case: 23-30382     Document: 00517009513           Page: 3   Date Filed: 12/20/2023

                                    No. 23-30382

          This court addressed the impact of Bruen on the constitutionality of
   § 922(g)(1) in United States v. Jones, No. 23-10198, 2023 WL 8074295, at *1
   (5th Cir. Nov. 21, 2023) (per curiam published opinion). The Jones court
   reviewed § 922(g)(1) for plain error and reasoned that if an argument requires
   “the extension of existing precedent [then it] cannot meet the plain error
   standard.” Id. at *2 (citations omitted). This court also held that the
   appellant failed to demonstrate that the district court’s application of §
   922(g)(1) constituted plain error, meaning it was not clear or obvious error,
   and affirmed the lower court’s opinion. Id. at *2–3.
          Applying the same standard to the instant case yields the same result,
   and Jackson has not shown that any error was clear or obvious. Consequently,
   his appeal cannot survive plain error review. Moreover, absent a Supreme
   Court decision or our court sitting en banc and providing an “intervening
   contrary or superseding decision,” a panel of this court “cannot overrule a
   prior panel’s decision.” Burge v. Par. of St. Tammany, 187 F.3d 452, 466 (5th
   Cir. 1999). Thus, we must adhere to the precedent set by Jones and conclude
   that Jackson’s argument does not survive plain error review. 2023 WL
   8074295, at *1–3.
          Therefore, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

                                         3