United States v. Aranda

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: November 14, 2001
• Docket: 01-40011
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-40011 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JESUS ARANDA

Defendant - Appellant

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-301-1 -------------------- November 9, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesus Aranda appeals his conviction for stealing a firearm

from a licensed firearms dealer that had “been shipped or

transported in interstate or foreign commerce,” in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 922(u). Aranda contends that the evidence was

insufficient to satisfy the interstate commerce element of 18

U.S.C. § 922(u).

The statute does not exceed the power of Congress to

legislate under the Commerce Clause because the language “shipped

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 01-40011 -2-

or transported in interstate or foreign commerce” provides the

requisite interstate commerce element. 18 U.S.C. § 922(u);

United States v. Luna, 165 F.3d 316, 320-22 (5th Cir.), cert.

denied, 526 U.S. 1126 (1999). The undisputed evidence revealed

that the firearm was manufactured in Connecticut and that Aranda

stole the firearm from a firearms dealer in Texas. A mere

showing that the weapon in question traveled at some time from

one state to another is enough to demonstrate the jurisdictional

element. See Luna, 165 F.3d at 322; United States v. Gresham,

118 F.3d 258, 264-65 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1052

(1998); United States v. Pierson, 139 F.3d 501, 503-04 (5th Cir.

1998); United States v. Rawls, 85 F.3d 240, 242-43 (5th Cir.

1996).

AFFIRMED.