United States v. John Balentine
This text of United States v. John Balentine (United States v. John Balentine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 24-3433 ___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
John Balentine
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________
Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Northern ____________
Submitted: March 5, 2026 Filed: March 10, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________
Before SHEPHERD, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
John Balentine appeals after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. He argues that the district court1 erred by denying his motion to dismiss
1 The Honorable Lee P. Rudofsky, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. the indictment because the prosecution violated the Second Amendment, both facially and as applied to him. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court properly denied the motion, as Balentine’s argument is foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v. Seay, 620 F.3d 919, 923 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review); United States v. Jackson, 110 F.4th 1120, 1124-25 (8th Cir. 2024), cert. denied, 145 S. Ct. 2708 (2025); United States v. Cunningham, 114 F.4th 671, 675 (8th Cir. 2024). Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. John Balentine, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-balentine-ca8-2026.