314 A.3d 80
D.C.2024Background
- Roderick Chew was convicted of three gun-related offenses in the District of Columbia: possession of an unregistered firearm (UF), carrying a pistol without a license (CPWL), and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (UP).
- Chew argued that the D.C. firearm registration and licensing statutes are facially unconstitutional under the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen.
- He also challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for his UP conviction and argued that his convictions for CPWL and UF should merge with his UP conviction under Double Jeopardy principles.
- Chew did not raise his constitutional arguments at trial, but the court assumed they could be reviewed for plain error.
- The facts showed Chew was observed in a suspected drug transaction, drove off quickly, and was seen by an eyewitness throwing a gun out of his car; DNA evidence also linked him to the firearm.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutionality of D.C. gun registration law | Statute gives MPD too much discretion (“may” issue) in violation of Second Amendment | Chew not eligible for registration due to felony; statute doesn't impact him | No plain error; Chew not eligible, cannot bring facial challenge |
| Constitutionality of D.C. gun licensing law | "May issue" and "proper reason" requirements violate Second Amendment post-Bruen | "Proper reason" requirement enjoined; Chew ineligible for license due to felony | No plain error; statutory requirements did not affect Chew's rights |
| Sufficiency of the Evidence (UP conviction) | Evidence did not prove Chew possessed the firearm beyond a reasonable doubt | Eyewitness and DNA evidence linked Chew to the gun | Evidence sufficient; conviction affirmed |
| Merger of Convictions under Double Jeopardy | CPWL and UF should merge with UP since UP enhances punishment for same conduct | Each offense requires proof of a different element; prior cases hold no merger | No merger; convictions do not merge under Blockburger test |
Key Cases Cited
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court held that "proper cause" licensing schemes violate the Second Amendment)
- Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 864 F.3d 650 (D.C. Circuit invalidated "proper reason" requirement for D.C. gun licenses)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (separate offenses require proof of distinct elements for Double Jeopardy)
- Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (defined waiver as intentional relinquishment of a known right)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (clarified distinction between waiver and forfeiture; laid out plain error test)
- Watts v. United States, 362 A.2d 706 (plain error review applicable to unpreserved claims despite categorical language in rule)
- Washington v. United States, 53 A.3d 307 (D.C. law: UP, CPWL, and UF have distinct elements; do not merge)