United States v. Reed

101 F. App'x 533

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS June 23, 2004 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk

No. 03-51313 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BOBBY JOE REED, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-03-CR-166-ALL-SS --------------------

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Bobby Joe Reed, Jr., appeals his guilty plea conviction for

possessing a stolen firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(j)

and 924(a)(2). Reed argues that 18 U.S.C. § 922(j), which

prohibits the possession of a stolen firearm, is unconstitutional

in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v.

Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). Reed concedes that this issue is

foreclosed by our opinion in United States v. Luna, 165 F.3d 316

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 03-51313 -2-

(5th Cir. 1999), and he raises the issue only to preserve it for

possible Supreme Court review.

A panel of this court cannot overrule a prior panel’s

decision in the absence of an intervening contrary or superseding

decision by this court sitting en banc or by the United States

Supreme Court. Burge v. Parish of St. Tammany, 187 F.3d 452, 466

(5th Cir. 1999). No such decision overruling Luna exists.

Accordingly, Reed’s argument is indeed foreclosed. The judgment

of the district court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.