United States v. John Bloch, III, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 10024

Police respond to gunfire at a Delaware Street apartment; Bloch, obviously intoxicated, is at the door and is told to step outside while officers sweep the unit.
The apartment belonged to Bloch's girlfriend; firearms (Glock handgun and SKS rifle) are found in plain view during the search, along with ammunition.
Bloch, a felon and DV misdemeanor, is indicted for unlawful firearm possession under § 922(g)(1) and (g)(9); he is arrested after insisting the guns are his.
While jailed, Bloch tells an inmate that the guns were at his girlfriend's apartment and that he should have hidden them better; at trial, sober statements corroborate ownership.
The district court groups the two § 922(g) counts for sentencing, determines an advisory range, and imposes 120 months on the first count and 18 months on the second, totaling 138 months.
The court later concludes the two § 922(g) convictions arise from a single incident and are multiplicitous; merger is required and resentencing is necessary.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there sufficient evidence Bloch possessed the firearms?	Bloch argues intoxication undermines reliability of ownership statements.	State that possession was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.	Yes; statements at scene and in jail, plus corroborating admissions, sufficed.
Should the two § 922(g) convictions be merged or treated as separate counts?	Two convictions arose from the same possession incident; multiplicity should be avoided.	Not expressly argued; focus on separate classifications.	Convictions are multiplicitous and must be merged into a single § 922(g) conviction with resentencing.

United States v. Allen, 383 F.3d 644 (7th Cir. 2004) (establishes that proof of possession requires nexus to the defendant and interstate commerce)
United States v. Villasenor, 664 F.3d 673 (7th Cir. 2011) (distinguishes actual vs constructive possession and nexus requirements)
United States v. Griffin, 684 F.3d 691 (7th Cir. 2012) (nexus and the risk of convicting a mere bystander in constructive possession cases)
United States v. Parker, 508 F.3d 434 (7th Cir. 2007) (multiplicity rule: single incident supports only one § 922(g) conviction)
United States v. Moses, 513 F.3d 727 (7th Cir. 2008) (unit of prosecution for § 922(g) is the act of possession, not number of firearms)
United States v. Buchmeier, 255 F.3d 415 (7th Cir. 2001) (multiple firearms possessed at once yield a single § 922(g) charge)
United States v. Richardson, 439 F.3d 421 (8th Cir. 2006) (circuits align on unit of prosecution being possession incident)