United States v. Aqudre Quailes

126 F.4th 215 (3d Cir. 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · January 17, 2025 · No. Nos. 23-2533 and 23-2604

Summary

The Third Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of indictments against two defendants charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Applying the Supreme Court's Bruen framework, the court held that the statute is constitutional as applied to individuals who have not yet completed their criminal sentences, including those on state parole or probation. Relying on historical traditions of disarming convicts during their sentences, the court concluded that such defendants lack a Second Amendment right to possess firearms.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Writing for the Court
Krause, Circuit Judge; Chung, Circuit Judge; Rendell, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
Third Circuit
Decision date
January 17, 2025
Docket number
Nos. 23-2533 and 23-2604
Procedural posture
The United States appealed orders of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania dismissing separate indictments charging Aqudre Quailes and Ayinda Harper with violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court held that applying the felon-in-possession statute to the defendants was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
Standard of review
The court reviewed the district court's legal conclusions on motions to dismiss indictments de novo and its factual findings for clear error.
Precedential value
precedential
Parties
United States of America v. Aqudre Quailes, Ayinda Harper
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

second amendmentcriminal procedurefourteenth amendmentsentencingprobation

Practice areas

criminal lawconstitutional lawfederal firearms lawcriminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is constitutional as applied to felons who possess firearms while serving terms of state parole or probation.
  2. Whether the district court erred by dismissing the indictments on Second Amendment grounds.

Holdings

  1. Felons who are still serving criminal sentences on state parole or probation do not have a Second Amendment right to possess firearms.
  2. Section 922(g)(1) is constitutional as applied to Quailes and Harper because both were serving criminal sentences under state supervision when they possessed firearms.

Key quotations

Because neither Quailes nor Harper had completed service of their criminal sentence, neither had “a Second Amendment right to possess a firearm.”
Because parolees and probationers— like convicts on federal supervised release—are still serving their sentences, the Second Amendment affords them no protection.
We thus join our sister circuits in holding that § 922(g)(1) is constitutional as applied to convicts on parole or probation.

Factual background

Harper was serving Pennsylvania state probation and parole when authorities discovered photographs of him holding firearms and found a semiautomatic pistol in a backpack during a home visit. Quailes was on Pennsylvania parole when arrested for absconding from parole, and authorities found two semiautomatic handguns and ammunition in his girlfriend's apartment after obtaining consent to search. Both defendants had multiple prior felony convictions and were charged under § 922(g)(1).

Procedural history

Quailes and Harper were separately indicted in 2021 for possessing firearms as felons. Each moved to dismiss under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen and Range I. The district court granted both motions, concluding that § 922(g)(1) was unconstitutional as applied. The Government appealed, and the Third Circuit consolidated the appeals, reversed, and remanded.

Remand instructions

The cases were remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion after reversal of the orders dismissing the indictments.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…