USA v. Louis Lavaris, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [17-10311 Affirmed ] Judge: CDK , Judge: JWE , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 10/27/2017 for Appellant Louis Lavaris Jr.; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellant Mr. Louis Lavaris, Jr. [8521009-2] [17-10311]
Date Filed: 10/06/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
October 6, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
LOUIS LAVARIS, JR.,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:16-CR-26-1
Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Louis Lavaris, Jr., appeals his conviction and the 96-month sentence
imposed after he pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
He asserts that the Government failed to state a federal offense in his
indictment because 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional on its face in that
the element “in or affecting commerce” cannot be satisfied merely by the
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 10/06/2017
possession of a firearm that had traveled in interstate commerce at some point
As Lavaris concedes, his argument is foreclosed by United States v.
Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513 (5th Cir. 2001), in which we held that “the
constitutionality of § 922(g) is not open to question,” id. at 518 (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted), and United States v. Luna, 165 F.3d
316, 319-22 (5th Cir. 1999), in which we concluded that § 922(j) was similar to
§ 922(g) and the phrase “shipped or transported in, interstate or foreign
commerce,” provided “the requisite nexus to commerce” to allow Congress to
exercise its powers under the Commerce Clause. Accordingly, Lavaris’s motion
for summary disposition is GRANTED and the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?