People v. Garvin
994 N.E.2d 1076
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Police executed a search warrant at Kevin Garvin’s home and found 5 live .38-caliber bullets in a tin on an entertainment center; Garvin’s ID and other personal items were adjacent; no firearm was recovered.
- Officers also found and recovered crack cocaine on Garvin and his girlfriend; Garvin admitted the bullets and drugs were his.
- Garvin, a convicted felon with recent probation, was charged with unlawful use/possession of a weapon by a felon (UUWF) based on possession of ammunition and possession of a controlled substance; convicted at bench trial.
- At sentencing the court imposed concurrent prison terms; Garvin appealed claiming the UUWF statute (720 ILCS 5/24-1.1(a)) is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment because it criminalizes possession of ammunition absent a firearm.
- The State argued (1) Garvin’s probation rules might have waived his claim (but the probation document was not in the appellate record), and (2) felon-based firearm/ammunition bans are outside Second Amendment protection and survive constitutional review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UUWF (prohibiting felons from possessing firearm ammunition) violates the Second Amendment facially | State: statute targets felons only, so it regulates conduct outside core Second Amendment protection and is presumptively valid | Garvin: blanket ban on ammunition in the home infringes core right to keep arms (self-defense at home) and is facially invalid | Court: statute is not facially invalid; felon-based bans (including ammunition) do not fall within protected Second Amendment conduct |
| Whether UUWF is unconstitutional as applied to Garvin | State: Garvin may have waived his claim by probation terms (evidence not in record); without that record, as-applied relief is premature | Garvin: his conviction for mere possession of bullets in his home, without a firearm, violates his individual right to keep arms | Court: declined to consider probation document (not in record) but in any event rejected the as-applied challenge—felon-based prohibition on ammunition is constitutional |
| What level of scrutiny applies if Second Amendment is implicated | State: statute targets felons and does not implicate the core right; at most rational-basis or intermediate scrutiny which statute satisfies | Garvin: core-home protection requires strict scrutiny and the statute is not narrowly tailored/necessary | Court: even if Second Amendment were implicated, the statute survives heightened review (court affirms reasoning of precedents upholding felon-based firearms/ammo bans) |
| Scope of Second Amendment protection for ammunition | State: right to possess ammunition is not coextensive for felons; Heller reserved felon prohibitions | Garvin: ammunition possession in the home is coextensive with firearm possession (citing Herrington) | Court: rejects Garvin’s position; holds state’s authority to ban felons from firearms reasonably extends to ammunition; no controlling authority finding felon-ammunition bans unconstitutional |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognizes individual right to possess arms for self-defense and notes longstanding prohibitions on firearm possession by felons remain valid)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (incorporates Second Amendment against the states and reiterates that incorporation does not invalidate longstanding firearm regulations)
- Wilson v. County of Cook, 2012 IL 112026 (Ill. 2012) (adopts two-step test: textual/historical inquiry whether conduct is protected, then the appropriate level of scrutiny)
- Herrington v. United States, 6 A.3d 1237 (D.C. 2010) (held unconstitutional as applied when prosecution did not show defendant was disqualified from Second Amendment rights; distinguished by facts and statutory scope)
- United States v. Rozier, 598 F.3d 768 (11th Cir. 2010) (upholds felon-in-possession statutes post-Heller; supports the proposition that felons may be disqualified from possessing firearms or ammunition)