United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Pablo Maldonado, Defendant-appellant, 87 F.3d 1324 (9th Cir. 1996)

MEMORANDUM^** 

We reject Maldonado's argument that Congress had no authority to pass 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (5). See United States v. Lopez, 115 S. Ct. 1624 (1995). In contrast to the statute at issue in Lopez, section 922(g) requires the government to prove the firearm "has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce." 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). We have held that " [s]ection 922(g)'s requirement that the firearm have been, at some time, in interstate commerce is sufficient to establish its constitutionality under the Commerce Clause." United States v. Hanna, 55 F.3d 1456, 1462 n. 2 (9th Cir. 1995). See also United States v. Collins, 61 F.3d 1379, 1383-84 (9th Cir. 1995).

AFFIRMED.