Background
Dontae Lamonte Burrage entered a conditional guilty plea to unlawful possession of a firearm as a felon under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The conditional plea preserved his right to appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment.
On appeal, Burrage argued that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment both on its face and as applied to him. The appeal arose from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, where Chief Judge Stephanie M. Rose had denied his motion.
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment. In an unpublished per curiam opinion, the panel held that Burrage’s facial and as-applied Second Amendment challenges were foreclosed by binding circuit precedent.
The court relied on United States v. Torres, United States v. Wako, and United States v. Jackson, which rejected the constitutional theories Burrage advanced against the federal felon-in-possession statute. Because existing Eighth Circuit law controlled, the panel did not conduct a new historical analysis of the statute.
Key Takeaways
- Eighth Circuit precedent forecloses facial Second Amendment challenges to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- The same precedent barred Burrage’s as-applied challenge to the felon-in-possession prohibition.
- A conditional guilty plea allowed Burrage to preserve the constitutional issue for appellate review, but the court affirmed his conviction.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that, within the Eighth Circuit, defendants remain bound by circuit precedent sustaining the federal felon-in-possession statute against facial and as-applied Second Amendment attacks. District courts and ordinary appellate panels must follow that precedent unless it is displaced by the en banc court or the Supreme Court.