United States v. Higgins ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • Case: 21-10544     Document: 00516103309         Page: 1     Date Filed: 11/22/2021
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Fifth Circuit                          United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    November 22, 2021
    No. 21-10544
    Summary Calendar                    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    United States of America,
    Plaintiff—Appellee,
    versus
    James Leon Higgins,
    Defendant—Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:21-CR-15-1
    Before Jolly, Willett, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
    Per Curiam:*
    James Leon Higgins appeals his guilty plea conviction for possessing a
    firearm following a felony conviction, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 922
    (g)(1)
    and 924(a)(2), and his above-guidelines sentence of 64 months in prison. He
    raises arguments relating to the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) and the
    *
    Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
    circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
    Case: 21-10544      Document: 00516103309           Page: 2    Date Filed: 11/22/2021
    No. 21-10544
    sufficiency of the factual basis in support of his guilty plea. The Government
    has filed a motion for summary affirmance, which Higgins does not oppose.
    In the alternative, the Government seeks an extension of time to file its brief.
    For the following reasons, we dispense with further briefing and AFFIRM.
    First, Higgins argues that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as
    interpreted by this court, as there is no requirement to show that the weapon
    crossed state lines in the furtherance of interstate commerce or that the
    defendant’s possession resulted from an engagement in interstate commerce.
    As he concedes, these arguments are foreclosed.            See United States v.
    Alcantar, 
    733 F.3d 143
    , 146 (5th Cir. 2013).
    Higgins next argues that the factual basis in support of his guilty plea
    is insufficient because it does not establish that he knew that the firearm had
    traveled in interstate commerce. We have concluded that a § 922(g)(1)
    conviction does not require proof that a defendant knew that the firearm had
    traveled in interstate commerce. See United States v. Dancy, 
    861 F.2d 77
    , 81
    (5th Cir. 1988). Higgins does not articulate any argument that this specific
    holding in Dancy has been unequivocally overruled by Rehaif v. United States,
    
    139 S. Ct. 2191
    , 2196 (2019). See Alcantar, 733 F.3d at 145–46 (discussing this
    court’s rule of orderliness).
    In light of the foregoing, the Government’s motion for summary
    affirmance is GRANTED, the Government’s alternative motion for an
    extension of time to file an appellate brief is DENIED as unnecessary, and
    the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-10544

Filed Date: 11/22/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/22/2021