United States v. Peterson, 24-30043

George Peterson operated a firearm business from his home in Louisiana and was investigated by the ATF for regulatory violations related to firearm sales and business representation.
A search warrant was issued and executed at Peterson's home and business by federal and state officers, leading to the discovery of an unregistered, homemade firearm suppressor.
Peterson was indicted under the National Firearms Act (NFA) for possession of an unregistered suppressor.
He filed pretrial motions to dismiss the indictment (arguing the NFA violated his Second Amendment rights) and to suppress evidence (arguing the search violated the Fourth Amendment).
The district court denied both motions; Peterson entered a conditional guilty plea to preserve these issues for appeal.
On appeal, Peterson argued the NFA's registration scheme was unconstitutional as applied to suppressors and that evidence from the ATF search should have been suppressed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of NFA suppressor-registration	NFA's licensing scheme constitutional under Bruen	NFA violates Second Amendment as applied to suppressors	NFA is presumptively constitutional; Peterson's as-applied challenge failed
Suppression of evidence from home/business search	Good-faith exception to exclusionary rule bars suppression	Search warrant lacked probable cause; evidence should be suppressed	Good-faith exception applies; suppression denied

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (recognizes Second Amendment right but notes it is not unlimited)
New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (articulates test and presumption for shall-issue firearm licensing regimes)
United States v. Sibley, 448 F.3d 754 (explains good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule)
United States v. Craig, 861 F.2d 818 (issuance of a warrant by magistrate judge establishes officer good-faith)
United States v. Phillips, 645 F.3d 859 (as-applied challenges are confined to facts of the case)