United States v. Faniel ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                       United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    April 16, 2003
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 02-20603
    Summary Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-
    Appellee,
    versus
    KEDRON TROY FANIEL,
    Defendant-
    Appellant.
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. H-01-CR-590-ALL
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Kedron Troy Faniel appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for being a felon in
    possession of a firearm, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 922
    (g)(1) and 924(a)(2). He contends that the
    district court erred by enhancing his sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) because the evidence was
    insufficient to show that he had possessed the firearm in connect ion with the Texas felony of
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
    published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. He contends that the factual basis for the “interstate commerce”
    element of 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g) was insufficient to support the guilty plea. He concedes that this latter
    issue is foreclosed by this court’s precedent, but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court
    review.
    The district court did not err in enhancing Faniel’s sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5).
    The undisputed facts set forth in the presentence report provided sufficient circumstantial evidence
    that Faniel knew he did not have the owner’s consent to operate the vehicle he was driving at the time
    of the arrest, in which the firearm was found. See United States v. Davis, 
    76 F.3d 82
    , 84 (5th Cir.
    1996); TEX. PENAL CODE § 31.07(a); White v. State, 
    844 S.W. 2d 929
    , 932 (Tex. App. 1992).
    The interstate commerce element of 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1) is satisfied by the possession of
    a firearm that was manufactured in a different state or country. United States v. Daugherty, 
    264 F.3d 513
    , 518 & n.12 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 
    534 U.S. 1150
     (2002). This element is satisfied
    because the firearm possessed by Faniel previously traveled in interstate commerce. See United
    States v. Rawls, 
    85 F.3d 240
    , 242-43 (5th Cir. 1996). As one panel of this court may not overrule
    or ignore a prior panel decision, see United States v. Ruiz, 
    180 F.3d 675
    , 676 (5th Cir. 1999), this
    issue is foreclosed.
    AFFIRMED.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-20603

Filed Date: 4/16/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014