Background
Charlie Jackson Harper was indicted for unlawfully possessing a firearm and ammunition as a felon under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the statute violated the Second Amendment both on its face and as applied to him.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas denied the motion. Harper then entered a conditional guilty plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(a)(2), preserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss.
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment. The panel held that Harper’s facial and as-applied Second Amendment challenges to § 922(g)(1) were foreclosed by binding circuit precedent.
The court relied on United States v. Torres, United States v. Wako, and United States v. Jackson. Because those decisions controlled Harper’s constitutional arguments, the court rejected his challenge without conducting a new, defendant-specific historical analysis.
Key Takeaways
- Eighth Circuit precedent foreclosed Harper’s facial challenge to the federal felon-in-possession statute.
- The same precedent also foreclosed his as-applied Second Amendment challenge.
- A conditional guilty plea allowed Harper to preserve the dismissal issue for appellate review.
Why It Matters
The unpublished decision reinforces that, in the Eighth Circuit, defendants challenging § 922(g)(1) on Second Amendment grounds remain bound by the court’s existing decisions upholding the statute against facial and as-applied attacks.
The ruling also illustrates the practical effect of circuit precedent: a later panel may resolve a constitutional challenge by applying controlling decisions rather than revisiting the issue independently.