From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Irish

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jul 31, 2008
285 F. App'x 326 (8th Cir. 2008)

Summary

finding that the felon in possession statute doesn't violate the Second Amendment

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Radencich

Opinion

No. 06-4082.

Submitted: July 30, 2008.

Filed: July 31, 2008.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

Ian A. Lewis, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Springfield, MO (Raymond C. Conrad, Jr., Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, on the brief), for appellant.

Reginald Irish, Springfield, MO, pro se.

James J. Kelleher, Asst. U.S. Atty., Springfield, MO, for appellee.

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.


[UNPUBLISHED]


Reginald Irish pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). The district court sentenced Irish to 77 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release. On appeal, Irish's counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Irish has filed three pro se briefs. For the following reasons, we reject the arguments that they have raised.

The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

First, the Second Amendment does not bar laws prohibiting felons from possessing firearms. See Dist. of Columbia v. Heller, ___ U.S.___, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 2816-17, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008). Second, Congress did not exceed its authority or violate the Commerce Clause when it enacted section 922(g). See United States v. Hill, 386 F.3d 855, 859 (8th Cir. 2004); United States v. Shepherd, 284 F.3d 965, 969 (8th Cir. 2002). Third, general federal criminal laws like section 922(g) apply nationwide. See Lewis v. United States, 523 U.S. 155, 171, 118 S.Ct. 1135, 140 L.Ed.2d 271 (1998). Last, the required nexus between a firearm and commerce is established by showing that the firearm at one time traveled in interstate commerce. See United States v. Leathers, 354 F.3d 955, 959 (8th Cir. 2004).

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and deny Irish's motions for appointment of new counsel and for a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum. The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Irish

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Jul 31, 2008
285 F. App'x 326 (8th Cir. 2008)

finding that the felon in possession statute doesn't violate the Second Amendment

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Radencich

rejecting a Heller-based Equal Protection Clause challenge to the statute without stating what level of scrutiny the court employed

Summary of this case from U.S. v. Schultz
Case details for

U.S. v. Irish

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Reginald IRISH, Appellant

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Jul 31, 2008

Citations

285 F. App'x 326 (8th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Yancey

Since Heller was decided, no court has found the firearm restrictions in 18 U.S.C. § 922 to be…

U.S. v. Williams

We are further guided in our determination by the fact that every court to address the constitutionality of §…