United States v. Easton

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: July 7, 2023
• Docket: 22-11188
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 22-11188 Document: 00516813792 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/07/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 22-11188 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ July 7, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Joseph Michael Easton,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:22-CR-56-1 ______________________________

Before Jolly, Jones, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Joseph Michael Easton pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He appeals and, relying on National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012), argues for the first time that § 922(g)(1) exceeds the scope of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and is therefore unconstitutional. The

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 22-11188 Document: 00516813792 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/07/2023

No. 22-11188

Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance and an alternative request for an extension of time to file its brief. Easton correctly concedes that his arguments challenging the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) are foreclosed. See United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 145-46 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001); United States v. De Leon, 170 F.3d 494, 499 (5th Cir. 1999). He raises the arguments to preserve them for further review. Because summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.