State v. Craig
2013 Minn. LEXIS 112
Minn.2013Background
- Craig was convicted by a Ramsey County jury of possessing a firearm as an ineligible person under Minn. Stat. § 624.713, subd. 1(2).
- He moved to vacate the conviction on the ground that the statute, as applied to him, violated the Second Amendment.
- The district court denied relief; the court of appeals affirmed the statute as constitutional.
- Police recovered a loaded .22 revolver from Craig's backpack after stopping a maroon car linked to a domestic disturbance.
- Craig had a prior felony drug conviction (fifth-degree possession of a controlled substance) that was felony and designated a crime of violence by statute.
- The supreme court adopts a historical approach, concluding the statute is constitutional as applied because Craig, as a felon with a crime-of-violence conviction, falls outside the Second Amendment’s protections.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 624.713, subd. 1(2) violate the Second Amendment as applied to Craig? | Craig argues the statute infringes the Second Amendment right. | State argues the statute is presumptively lawful and within historical allowances. | No violation; statute constitutional as applied to Craig. |
| Is scrutiny necessary if Craig is categorically unprotected by the Second Amendment? | Craig should receive Second Amendment scrutiny protections. | No need for scrutiny if not within the Amendment's scope. | Scrutiny not required; Craig is categorically unprotected and analysis stops. |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. 2008) (recognizes presumptively lawful prohibitions and defines core Second Amendment scope)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (U.S. 2010) (incorporates Second Amendment against the states)
- United States v. Barton, 633 F.3d 168 (3d Cir. 2011) (applies Barton approach to as-applied felon challenges)
- Moore v. United States, 666 F.3d 313 (4th Cir. 2012) (facial challenges to felon-in-possession rejected; lawfulness depends on approach)
- United States v. Williams, 616 F.3d 692 (7th Cir. 2010) (categorical ban for felons; intermediate-like scrutiny applied to government ban)
- United States v. Skoien, 614 F.3d 638 (7th Cir. 2010) (presumptively lawful categories and historical inquiry guiding limits)
- United States v. Greeno, 679 F.3d 510 (6th Cir. 2012) (static reading of historical rights rejected; regulates for public safety)
- United States v. Torres-Rosario, 658 F.3d 110 (1st Cir. 2011) (discusses threshold inquiry whether felon remains within Second Amendment scope)