8 F.4th 754
8th Cir.2021Background:
- Joshua Lehman had been involuntarily committed by a state court order in March 2017.
- In Dec. 2017 and Feb. 2018, Lehman attempted to buy firearms and completed ATF Form 4473; he answered (or altered) the form to say he had not been committed.
- NICS denied both transactions; DOJ informed Lehman the prohibition stemmed from 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) (committed to a mental institution).
- The government charged Lehman under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A) for knowingly making false statements on the forms.
- Lehman moved to dismiss below arguing the ATF Form 4473 and its condition on disclosure violated his Second Amendment rights; the district court denied the motion, he was tried and convicted, and sentenced to 18 months.
- On appeal Lehman argued § 924(a)(1)(A) is unconstitutional as applied to him; the Eighth Circuit held he forfeited an as-applied Second Amendment challenge by not raising it below and found no plain error, affirming the judgment.
Issues:
| Issue | Lehman’s Argument | Government’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §924(a)(1)(A) is unconstitutional as applied because ATF Form 4473 conditions purchase on a statement about prior involuntary commitment | Form 4473’s precondition infringes Lehman’s Second Amendment right to possess a firearm | §924(a)(1)(A) criminalizes knowingly making false statements; the conduct (lying on the form) is not protected; longstanding prohibitions on mentally ill are presumptively lawful | Lehman forfeited an as‑applied Second Amendment challenge by not raising it in district court; no plain error; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (Second Amendment protects individual self-defense but is not unlimited; lists presumptively lawful restrictions)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (incorporated Second Amendment against the states)
- United States v. Adams, 914 F.3d 602 (8th Cir. 2019) (explains as-applied challenge framework for Second Amendment claims)
- Sanjour v. EPA, 56 F.3d 85 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (definition of as-applied challenge)
- United States v. Marcavage, 609 F.3d 264 (3d Cir. 2010) (as-applied challenge description)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error/forfeiture relief standard)