Background
San Ynes Patino was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) of possessing a firearm after a felony conviction. The predicate felony supporting the federal firearm charge was a conviction for simple drug possession.
On appeal, Patino argued that applying § 922(g)(1) to him violated the Second Amendment. The government conceded that the Fifth Circuit was required to reverse under United States v. Hembree, 165 F.4th 909 (5th Cir. 2026), which held the statute unconstitutional as applied to a defendant whose predicate felony was simple drug possession.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit held that § 922(g)(1), as applied to Patino, violated the Second Amendment. Because Patino’s predicate felony was simple drug possession, the court concluded that Hembree controlled his appeal.
The court reversed Patino’s conviction. Its per curiam opinion was issued on the summary calendar and was not designated for publication.
Key Takeaways
- Under binding Fifth Circuit precedent, § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as applied when the predicate felony is simple drug possession.
- The government conceded that Hembree required reversal because Patino’s predicate offense matched the one addressed there.
- The court reversed Patino’s felon-in-possession conviction rather than merely remanding for reconsideration.
Why It Matters
The decision applies Hembree directly and confirms that defendants convicted under § 922(g)(1) based on a simple drug-possession felony may obtain as-applied Second Amendment relief in the Fifth Circuit.
The opinion does not invalidate § 922(g)(1) across the board; its holding is limited to the statute’s application to Patino in light of the nature of his predicate felony.