Commonwealth v. Randolph

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court reviews Andre Randolph Jr.’s constitutional challenges to 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(a)(1), which prohibits certain persons with prior drug convictions from possessing firearms. Applying Second Amendment precedent, including Heller, Bruen, and Rahimi, the court addresses both as-applied and facial challenges to the statute in connection with Randolph’s convictions for persons not to possess a firearm and carrying a firearm without a license. The court affirms the judgment of sentence.

Holdings

1. Section 6105(a)(1) was constitutional as applied to Randolph, whose prior possession-with-intent-to-deliver convictions placed him within a category of persons historically subject to firearm restrictions.
2. Randolph's facial challenge failed because § 6105(a)(1) was constitutional in at least one application, including its application to Randolph, and he did not show that the statute lacked any plainly legitimate sweep.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(a)(1), as applied to Randolph based on prior possession-with-intent-to-deliver convictions, violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
2. Whether 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(a)(1) was facially unconstitutional under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.

Disposition

affirmed