USA v. Kwaesi Collins, No. 13-10074 (5th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 13-10074 Document: 00512670676 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/19/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-10074 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 19, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. KWAESI COLLINS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:12-CR-187-1 Before REAVLEY, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Kwaesi Collins appeals his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e). Relying on Nat l Fed n of Indep. Bus. (NFIB) v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012), Collins contends that § 922(g)(1) exceeds Congress s power under the Commerce Clause. He argues that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as applied because the indictment did not state that his possession of the firearm was an economic activity and failed to Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 13-10074 Document: 00512670676 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/19/2014 No. 13-10074 reflect that he was engaged in the relevant market at the time of the regulated conduct. Further, he contends that § 922(g)(1) is facially unconstitutional because NFIB interpreted the Commerce Clause to mandate that Congress may regulate only ongoing economic activity, and his possession of a firearm purchased many years ago does not qualify. This court reviews preserved constitutional claims and the denial of a motion to dismiss an indictment de novo. See United States v. Whaley, 577 F.3d 254, 256 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Kay, 513 F.3d 432, 440 (5th Cir. 2007). In United States v. Wallace, 889 F.2d 580, 583 (5th Cir. 1989), and decisions following, this court held that § 922(g)(1) was a valid exercise of Congress s authority under the Commerce Clause. United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145 (5th Cir. 2013), cert. denied ___ S. Ct. ___, 2014 WL 682525 (2014). NFIB did not overrule this court s precedent upholding § 922(g)(1). Id. at 146. Accordingly, Collins s argument that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional on its face is foreclosed. See id. Furthermore, this court s cases upholding § 922(g)(1) uniformly establish that the statute is constitutional in that it properly regulates the possession of guns that have moved in interstate commerce. See, e.g., United States v. Rawls, 85 F.3d 240, 242 (5th Cir. 1996). There is no additional requirement that, to apply the law constitutionally, the Government must prove some economic activity beyond the interstate movement of the weapon. See United States v. Meza, 701 F.3d 411, 418 (5th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, Collins s constitutional challenge to the application of § 922(g)(1) also fails. AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
