United States v. Hahn

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 10, 2025
Docket24-40437
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Hahn (United States v. Hahn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Hahn, (5th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

Case: 24-40437 Document: 81-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/10/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED October 10, 2025 No. 24-40437 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Derrick Hahn,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:23-CR-240-1 ______________________________

Before Smith, Dennis, and Richman, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Derrick Hahn pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On appeal, he asserts that (1) § 922(g)(1) facially violates the Second Amendment; (2) § 922(g)(1) as applied to him violates the Second Amendment; and (3) § 922(g)(1) as applied to him violates the Commerce Clause. Hahn concedes that all three challenges are foreclosed. See United States v. Kimble, 142 F.4th 308, 310 n.2 (5th Cir. 2025) (holding

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 24-40437 Document: 81-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/10/2025

No. 24-40437

that United States v. Diaz, 116 F.4th 458 (5th Cir. 2024), forecloses facial challenges to § 922(g)(1) based on the Second Amendment); United States v. Alaniz, 146 F.4th 1240, 1241 (5th Cir. 2025) (rejecting a defendant’s as- applied challenge to § 922(g)(1) because that defendant, like Hahn, had a prior felony conviction for burglary); Kimble, 142 F.4th at 310 n.2 (holding that United States v. Jones, 88 F.4th 571, 573 (5th Cir. 2023), forecloses Commerce Clause challenges to § 922(g)(1)). AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Diaz
116 F.4th 458 (Fifth Circuit, 2024)
United States v. Kimble
142 F.4th 308 (Fifth Circuit, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Hahn, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hahn-ca5-2025.