Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction of James Gould, who pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) for possessing a firearm after being involuntarily committed to a mental institution. Gould appealed, arguing that the statute was facially unconstitutional under the Second Amendment following the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen. Applying Bruen’s two-step historical test, the court concluded that disarming individuals formally committed to mental institutions because they pose a danger to themselves or others is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4), which bars firearm possession by a person previously involuntarily committed to a mental institution, is facially unconstitutional under the Second Amendment after New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen and United States v. Rahimi.
- Whether the availability of release from involuntary commitment means that the firearm prohibition must automatically terminate upon release.
Holdings
- Section 922(g)(4) is facially constitutional because it has constitutional applications, including applications involving persons judicially determined to be dangerous to themselves or others because of mental illness and who may seek restoration of firearm rights through a state process.
- Release from a mental institution does not necessarily establish that a person is no longer dangerous and therefore does not automatically invalidate § 922(g)(4)'s firearm prohibition.
Key quotations
“And when combined with the historical treatment of those who suffered from mental illness, we perceive an unambiguous history and tradition of disarming and incarcerating those whose illness made them a danger to themselves or others.” (at 19)
“Disarmament under § 922(g)(4) is facially constitutional because situations exist where it may be applied consistent with the Second Amendment.” (at 24)
Factual background
Gould was involuntarily committed to mental-health facilities four times between May 2016 and July 2019. In February 2022, police found him in his West Virginia home possessing a twelve-gauge shotgun. He was prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4), pleaded guilty, and challenged the statute on its face under the Second Amendment.
Procedural history
A federal grand jury indicted Gould for possessing a firearm after involuntary commitment to a mental institution. The Southern District of West Virginia denied his motion to dismiss on Second Amendment grounds, after which he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to time served and three years of supervised release. The Fourth Circuit affirmed.