Summary
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction of Matthew Hunt for violating the federal felon-in-possession statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The court held that Supreme Court decisions in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and United States v. Rahimi do not abrogate binding circuit precedent foreclosing as-applied Second Amendment challenges by convicted felons. Alternatively, the court concluded that the statute survives constitutional scrutiny under the Bruen historical test because prohibitions on firearm possession by felons are consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of regulating firearms.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is facially unconstitutional under the Second Amendment after New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen and United States v. Rahimi.
- Whether Hunt could prevail on an as-applied Second Amendment challenge to § 922(g)(1) despite binding Fourth Circuit precedent.
- Whether the district court clearly erred in finding by a preponderance of the evidence that Hunt fired a firearm inside the apartment, supporting the four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
Holdings
- Section 922(g)(1) is facially constitutional after Bruen and Rahimi, consistent with binding Fourth Circuit precedent.
- Bruen and Rahimi did not abrogate Fourth Circuit precedent foreclosing as-applied challenges to § 922(g)(1); that precedent remains binding.
- Even without binding Fourth Circuit precedent, § 922(g)(1) is constitutional as applied to Hunt and other convicted felons; no felony-by-felony litigation is required.
- The district court did not clearly err in finding that Hunt fired a firearm inside the apartment, so the four-level enhancement for using or possessing a firearm in connection with another felony offense was properly applied.
Key quotations
“we hold that neither Bruen nor Rahimi meets this Court’s stringent test for abrogating otherwise-controlling circuit precedent and that our precedent on as-applied challenges thus remains binding.” (at 699)
“Having concluded “there is no need for felony-by-felony litigation regarding the constitutionality of ” Section 922(g)(1), United States v. Jackson, 110 F.4th 1120, 1125 (8th Cir. 2024), we reject appellant Matthew Hunt’s as-applied challenge without regard to the specific conviction that established his inability to lawfully possess firearms.” (at 700)
“We agree that “either reading” of the relevant history “supports the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) as applied to [Hunt] and other convicted felons.”” (at 713)
“We thus reject Hunt’s as-applied constitutional challenge at step two of the Bruen analysis as well.” (at 716)
“Taken as a whole, we conclude there was sufficient evidence for the district court to determine, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Hunt fired a gun in the apartment.” (at 718)
Factual background
Hunt was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) based on a 2017 West Virginia conviction for breaking and entering. Police found a firearm and bullet casing near Hunt in an apartment, and a neighbor reported hearing gunshots shortly before police arrived; gunshot residue was found on Hunt and another person present. The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Hunt fired the gun inside the apartment during a domestic-violence incident and applied a four-level Guidelines enhancement.
Procedural history
A grand jury charged Hunt with being a felon in possession of a firearm, identifying his 2017 West Virginia breaking-and-entering conviction as the predicate felony. Hunt pleaded guilty in May 2022 without raising a Second Amendment challenge in the district court. The district court imposed a sentence that included a four-level enhancement for using or possessing a firearm in connection with another felony offense. The Fourth Circuit affirmed.