United States v. Adan Smith

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: February 19, 2026
• Docket: 25-10494
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-10494 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 02/19/2026 Page: 1 of 2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-10494 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

ADAN E. SMITH, a.k.a. Adan Smith, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:24-cr-00305-TPB-SPF-1 ____________________

Before NEWSOM, LUCK, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Adan Smith challenges his conviction for possessing a fire- arm as a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He USCA11 Case: 25-10494 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 02/19/2026 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-10494

asserts that § 922(g)(1) violates the Commerce Clause, both facially and as applied to him. But as Smith concedes, our precedent fore- closes his argument. The statute is facially constitutional because it contains an express jurisdictional requirement. United States v. Edwards, 142 F.4th 1270, 1285 (11th Cir. 2025). And it’s constitu- tional as applied to Smith because his firearms and ammunition traveled in interstate or foreign commerce at some point, which establishes the requisite “minimal nexus” between interstate com- merce and his possession. See id. AFFIRMED.