United States v. Lane Dale Daniels

431 F.2d 697, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7431
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 8, 1970
Docket25297_1
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 431 F.2d 697 (United States v. Lane Dale Daniels) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. Lane Dale Daniels, 431 F.2d 697, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7431 (9th Cir. 1970).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Defendant appeals from his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C.App. § 1202 (convicted felon’s possession of a firearm). He contends that: (1) the statute is unconstitutional, because it purports to reach wholly intrastate transactions, and it is therefore beyond the scope of the Commerce Clause; and (2) the Government failed to prove that the firearm he possessed was in commerce or affected commerce, which is an element of the offense. We reject both contentions.

The numerous cases expanding the Commerce Clause to embrace local activities, when those activities bear even tangentially on interstate commerce defeat defendant’s constitutional argument. E. g., Maryland v. Wirtz (1968) 392 U.S. 183, 88 S.Ct. 2017, 20 L.Ed.2d 1020; Katzenbach v. McClung (1964) 379 U.S. 294, 85 S.Ct. 377, 13 L.Ed.2d 290; Wickard v. Filburn (1942) 317 U.S. 111, 63 S.Ct. 82, 87 L.Ed. 122; United States v. Biancofiori (7th Cir. 1970) 422 F.2d 584.

We hold that the fact that the firearm was in commerce or affected commerce is not an element of the offense stated in section 1202, adopting the rationale of United States v. Bass (S.D.N.Y.1970) 308 F.Supp. 1385.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

United States v. Marce Bell
524 F.2d 202 (Second Circuit, 1975)
United States v. Williams
370 F. Supp. 837 (N.D. Indiana, 1974)
United States v. Frank McKinnley Brown, Jr.
472 F.2d 1181 (Sixth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Snell
353 F. Supp. 280 (D. Maryland, 1973)
United States v. Carl P. Fiorito
465 F.2d 431 (Seventh Circuit, 1972)
United States v. James William Donofrio
450 F.2d 1054 (Fifth Circuit, 1972)
United States v. Bass
404 U.S. 336 (Supreme Court, 1971)
United States v. Tranquillo
330 F. Supp. 871 (M.D. Florida, 1971)
United States v. Hayden Thopless Crow
439 F.2d 1193 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)
Frank James Stevens v. United States
440 F.2d 144 (Sixth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Dale Einar Synnes
438 F.2d 764 (Eighth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Denneth Bass
434 F.2d 1296 (Second Circuit, 1970)
United States v. John Richard Liles
432 F.2d 18 (Ninth Circuit, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
431 F.2d 697, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lane-dale-daniels-ca9-1970.