United States v. Larry Kilby Fillingim
688 F. App'x 670
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Fillingim had prior Georgia felony convictions for aggravated stalking, aggravated assault, and false imprisonment, each punishable by more than one year.
- Years later he attempted to buy a pistol from a federally licensed dealer, answered falsely that he had no felony convictions, and was stopped by a background check.
- Federal agents interviewed him; he admitted the attempted purchase and ownership of other firearms and ammunition.
- A superseding federal indictment charged him with two counts of being a felon in possession (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and one count of making a false statement to a dealer (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)).
- Before pleading guilty (while reserving appeal on this issue), Fillingim moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing his Georgia convictions were void for lack of jurisdiction due to judicial corruption, unconstitutional confinement/medication, ineffective assistance of counsel, and other abuses.
- The district court denied the motion; Fillingim appealed the denial after pleading guilty to the counts while preserving the right to appeal that denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fillingim may collaterally attack his state felony convictions in a federal § 922(g)(1) prosecution | Fillingim: his state convictions were void for lack of jurisdiction due to severe constitutional defects, so they cannot support a federal felon-in-possession charge | Government: Lewis and Eleventh Circuit precedent bar collateral attacks in a federal felon-in-possession prosecution; convictions stood when the offense occurred | Court: Affirmed—collateral attack barred; convictions counted for § 922(g)(1) because they were not vacated before the firearm possession |
| Whether Heller permits collateral attack on felony status to assert Second Amendment right to possess a firearm | Fillingim: Heller recognizes a Second Amendment right to possess handguns and thus should allow challenge to felony status | Government: Heller explicitly preserves longstanding prohibitions on felons possessing firearms | Held: Heller does not permit collateral attack; longstanding prohibitions remain valid |
| Whether exceptional errors that allegedly deprive state court of subject-matter jurisdiction can be raised in § 922(g)(1) defense | Fillingim: jurisdictional defects make convictions void and thus not a basis for federal prosecution | Government: prior Eleventh Circuit decisions reject that exception; jurisdictional challenges must be raised in state court or prior habeas relief | Held: No exception—defendant must have had conviction vacated before possession; collateral attack in federal prosecution is barred |
| Procedural sufficiency of indictment after challenge | Fillingim: indictment should be dismissed if underlying convictions void | Government: indictment facially sufficient because convictions existed at the time of possession | Held: indictment sufficient; district court did not abuse discretion in denying dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (Sup. Ct. 1980) (defendant may not collaterally attack prior conviction in federal felon-in-possession prosecution)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (Sup. Ct. 2008) (recognized individual right to possess handgun in home but preserved prohibitions on felons)
- United States v. DuBose, 598 F.3d 726 (11th Cir. 2010) (rejected jurisdictional-exception collateral attack in analogous § 922 context)
- United States v. McIlwain, 772 F.3d 688 (11th Cir. 2014) (statutory interpretation of what constitutes prior conviction under § 922(g)(1))
- United States v. York, 428 F.3d 1325 (11th Cir. 2005) (standard of review for denial of motion to dismiss indictment)