CASE LAW UPDATE: Whether 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1) was not unconstitutional as applied to defendant?
Defendant was convicted of possession of firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1). Defendant appealed. On appeal, defendant argued that the statute was unconstitutional as applied to him because his possession of a firearm was not in or affecting commerce. Where the court had previously ruled in other cases that Congress had not exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause in enacting §922(g), defendant’s arguments on appeal were foreclosed. Affirmed.
United States v. Duchaine, 21-2297, per curiam. Appealed from United States District Court, District of North Dakota.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.