United States v. Alonzo Adams, 914 F.3d 602

Background

Adams, a felon with a prior Missouri conviction for carrying a concealed weapon, was stopped in Kansas City in July 2014; officers searched his car with consent and found a handgun under the driver’s seat; DNA linked Adams to the gun.
A federal grand jury indicted Adams under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm). He moved to dismiss, arguing an as-applied Second Amendment challenge because his prior was nonviolent.
The district court denied the motion, applying intermediate scrutiny and finding the statute served public safety; Adams entered a conditional guilty plea reserving appeal on the constitutional issue.
On appeal Adams argued § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as applied to him because Heller does not categorically exclude nonviolent felons and a lifetime ban is not narrowly tailored.
The panel majority held Adams forfeited his as-applied challenge by failing in district court to show his particular conduct was protected (i.e., he never argued the Second Amendment protects carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle), and denied relief under plain-error review.
A concurrence agreed the conviction should be affirmed but criticized the majority for focusing on the firearm’s alleged concealment—an element irrelevant to § 922(g)(1)—and advocated the common two-step Second Amendment framework used by other circuits.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as applied to Adams	Adams: His prior was a nonviolent felony; Heller didn’t categorically exclude nonviolent felons, so a lifetime ban is not narrowly tailored	Government: Felon-in-possession bans are presumptively lawful after Heller; felons historically fall outside the Amendment’s protection	Forfeited on appeal for failure to show his conduct was protected; denial affirmed under plain-error review
Whether Adams forfeited his as-applied claim by not proving his conduct was protected	Adams: Not required to prove every factual detail (location/concealment) to challenge § 922(g)(1)	Government: As-applied challenger must show the statute burdened constitutionally protected conduct	Majority: Challenger must show (1) conduct is protected and (2) conviction cannot justify regulation; Adams failed step 1 and forfeited
Whether carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle is protected conduct under the Second Amendment	Adams (on appeal): Second Amendment protects carrying concealed outside the home	Government: Historical tradition supports allowing regulation of concealed carry; reasonable dispute exists	Court: Not plainly or obviously protected; reasonable dispute exists based on historical authorities; fails plain-error standard
Proper analytical framework for as-applied Second Amendment claims	Adams/concurring judge: Use accepted two-step test (protective scope then means-end scrutiny) applied to statutory elements, not extraneous facts like concealment	Majority: Requires showing conduct protected and then whether conviction justifies regulation; may consider historical evidence including concealed-carry tradition	Judgment affirmed; concurrence criticizes majority’s fixation on concealment but concurs in result

Key Cases Cited

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognized individual right to possess firearms for self-defense; identified longstanding prohibitions — e.g., felons — as presumptively lawful)
McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (incorporated Second Amendment against the states)
United States v. Joos, 638 F.3d 581 (8th Cir. 2011) (rejected facial challenge to § 922(g)(1))
United States v. Woolsey, 759 F.3d 905 (8th Cir. 2014) (discussed limits of as-applied challenges to § 922(g)(1))
Binderup v. Attorney Gen., 836 F.3d 336 (3d Cir. 2016) (en banc) (plurality: serious offenders, violent or nonviolent, may be outside Second Amendment protection)
United States v. Marzzarella, 614 F.3d 85 (3d Cir. 2010) (articulated two-step framework: scope then means-end scrutiny)
United States v. Bena, 664 F.3d 1180 (8th Cir. 2011) (treated felons as generally outside core Second Amendment protections)
Peruta v. County of San Diego, 824 F.3d 919 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (concluded Second Amendment does not protect concealed carry)
Brown v. United States, 30 F.2d 474 (D.C. Cir. 1929) (upheld conviction for a pistol concealed under a vehicle seat)
United States v. Marcavage, 609 F.3d 264 (3d Cir. 2010) (described as-applied challenges as attacking statute’s application to particular facts)
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error forfeiture standard)
Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (clarified when legal error is "plain")