United States v. Barton
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 4111
| 3rd Cir. | 2011Background
- Barton pleaded guilty to two counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- A confidential informant paid Barton $300 for a revolver and ammunition; serial number was drilled out.
- A warrant led to a search of Barton’s residence, yielding seven pistols, five rifles, three shotguns, and various ammo.
- Barton had prior felony convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and for receipt of a stolen firearm.
- Barton argued § 922(g)(1) violated his Second Amendment right to defend hearth and home as recognized in Heller; district court declined to read Heller to invalidate felon-in-possession statutes.
- Barton entered conditional guilty pleas and was sentenced to 51 months in prison with three years of supervised release; he appealed challenging the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 922(g)(1) is facially unconstitutional. | Barton contends the statute violates the core Second Amendment right identified in Heller. | The Government contends felon-dispossession statutes are presumptively lawful and within historical regulation of arms. | Facial challenge fails; § 922(g)(1) is facially constitutional. |
| Whether § 922(g)(1) is constitutional as applied to Barton. | Barton argues his circumstances warrant an exception to the felon-dispossession rule. | The Government maintains the historical justifications support disqualification of felons from firearm possession. | As applied, § 922(g)(1) constitutional; Barton did not show distinguishing circumstances. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognizes fundamental right to keep and bear arms and presumptively lawful restrictions)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) (incorporation of Second Amendment rights; home defense core right)
- Marzzarella, 614 F.3d 85 (2010) (discusses regulation of unmarked firearms under intermediate scrutiny)
- United States v. Rozier, 598 F.3d 768 (11th Cir. 2010) (rejects purely dicta view of Heller's presumptive lawfulness)
- United States v. Vongxay, 594 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2010) (felon-dispossession regulations presumptively lawful; applied reasoning)
- United States v. Skoien, 614 F.3d 638 (7th Cir. 2010) (en banc decision upholding § 922(g)(1) against challenge)