United States v. Carter — Fifth Circuit affirmed felon-in-possession convictions against constitutional and double-jeopardy challenges

Case
United States of America v. Jarrod Carter
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge
Wiener (George H.W. Bush, 1990); Stewart (Bill Clinton, 1994)
Date Decided
July 27, 2026
Docket No.
25-30383
Topics
Second Amendment; Commerce Clause; Double Jeopardy; Firearms
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Jarrod Carter appealed his convictions for possessing a firearm after a felony conviction, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He argued that the statute violated both the Second Amendment and the Commerce Clause, facially and as applied to him.

Carter preserved his facial and as-applied challenges, so the Fifth Circuit reviewed them de novo. He also argued for the first time on appeal that his separate convictions and sentences on both indictment counts violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.

The Court’s Holding

In an unpublished per curiam opinion, the Fifth Circuit rejected Carter’s Second Amendment challenges. Circuit precedent had upheld applying § 922(g)(1) to disarm a felon previously convicted of a drug-trafficking offense, defeating Carter’s as-applied challenge. Carter acknowledged that circuit precedent also foreclosed his facial challenge.

The court likewise held that precedent foreclosed Carter’s Commerce Clause argument. Reviewing the newly raised double-jeopardy claim for plain error, the court concluded that Carter had not demonstrated plain error. It therefore affirmed the district court’s judgment.

Key Takeaways

  • Fifth Circuit precedent foreclosed Carter’s facial Second Amendment and Commerce Clause challenges to § 922(g)(1).
  • Precedent upholding the disarmament of a felon with a prior drug-trafficking conviction defeated Carter’s as-applied Second Amendment challenge.
  • Carter failed to establish plain error on his unpreserved claim that separate convictions and sentences on two counts violated double jeopardy.

Why It Matters

The decision applies the Fifth Circuit’s existing post-Bruen precedent to reject another constitutional challenge to the federal felon-in-possession statute. For defendants with prior drug-trafficking convictions, the opinion confirms that an as-applied Second Amendment challenge remains foreclosed in the circuit.

The ruling also illustrates the difficulty of obtaining relief on a double-jeopardy theory raised for the first time on appeal, where the defendant must satisfy plain-error review.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top