Dubose, Jr. v. United States, 213 A.3d 599

On June 16, 2015, MPD officers chased and apprehended Erwin Dubose, Jr.; a pat-down revealed a loaded pistol with extended magazine, 12.2 grams of crack cocaine, and $1,339.
A jury convicted Dubose of possession with intent to distribute cocaine while armed, PFCV, CPWL (carrying a pistol without a license), possession of an unregistered firearm (UF), unlawful possession of ammunition (UA), and possession of a large-capacity feeding device; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
Dubose filed a D.C. Code § 23-110 motion seeking to vacate CPWL, UF, and UA convictions, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel for not moving to dismiss those counts under the Second Amendment.
He relied (post-trial) on the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Wrenn invalidating the District’s “good reason” licensing requirement; Wrenn postdated his trial and sentencing.
The trial court denied relief, finding a motion to dismiss based on the Second Amendment would have been fruitless; this court affirms, rejecting both the ineffective-assistance claim and the Second Amendment challenges.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1) Was counsel ineffective for not moving to dismiss gun charges under the Second Amendment?	Dubose: counsel was deficient for failing to challenge gun counts under the Second Amendment (post-Wrenn logic).	Gov’t: counsel’s conduct was reasonable at the time; failing to anticipate Wrenn is not ineffective assistance.	Court: No ineffective assistance — counsel not deficient and no prejudice shown.
2) Do UF and UA convictions violate the Second Amendment?	Dubose: registration requirement and related convictions infringe Second Amendment rights.	Gov’t: registration requirement remains valid and is historically rooted; Wrenn did not invalidate registration statutes.	Court: UF and UA convictions constitutional; registration requirement stands.
3) Is the CPWL statute facially invalid or unconstitutional as applied to Dubose?	Dubose: because the “good reason” licensing rule prevented lawful carry, CPWL is invalid (facial/as-applied).	Gov’t: Wrenn severed “good reason” later; licensing and registration requirements (and suitability rules) remain; Dubose was unregistered and thus not entitled to a license.	Court: CPWL valid both facially and as applied; Dubose’s failure to register and lack of suitability foreclose his as-applied claim.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishing ineffective-assistance standard)
Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 864 F.3d 650 (D.C. Cir.) (invalidated DC’s “good reason” licensing rule)
Hooks v. United States, 191 A.3d 1141 (D.C. 2018) (court rejects a Second Amendment right to carry a concealed firearm in public and discusses effect of Wrenn)
Heller v. District of Columbia, 670 F.3d 1244 (D.C. Cir.) (upholding the constitutionality of handgun registration as historically rooted)
Brown v. United States, 979 A.2d 630 (D.C. 2009) (discussing facial challenges to CPWL statute)
Bost v. United States, 178 A.3d 1156 (D.C. 2018) (standards for § 23-110 and ineffective-assistance review)