Porter v. Nash
Filing
27
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 25 Report and Recommendations. For these reasons, the R&R is adopted and this petition is dismissed. Signed by District Judge Carlton W. Reeves on 11/19/2021 (LAT)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
RICHARD PORTER
PETITIONER
V.
CAUSE NO. 3:19-CV-500-CWR-FKB
CHERON Y. NASH
RESPONDENT
ORDER
Before the Court are the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), Docket
No. 25, and petitioner Richard Porter’s objection to that R&R, Docket No. 26.
Porter presents an interesting argument: whether receiving Louisiana’s first-offender pardon
rendered him eligible to lawfully possess a firearm, making his subsequent federal felon-inpossession conviction invalid under Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019). See also United
States v. Viola, 768 F. App’x 238 (5th Cir. 2019). Because the Court thinks that the answer to this
question is, on this record, “no,” it adopts the R&R and dismisses this petition.
There are at least two potential problems with accepting Porter’s premise. First, the PSR
shows that Porter did not satisfactorily complete the terms of Louisiana Constitution article I, § 20
and the first-offender pardon, in that his parole was revoked. See Docket No. 13-2 at 4. Second,
even assuming that the Louisiana Division of Probation and Parole’s certificate fully restored
Porter’s rights after his armed robbery convictions, see Docket No. 26 at 8, he does not then contend
that the state government restored his rights again after his next felony conviction—this time for
drug possession. See Docket No. 13-2 at 4. The better view of the record is that, at least by then,
there could be no doubt that Porter’s rights were not fully restored.
For these reasons, the R&R is adopted and this petition is dismissed.
SO ORDERED, this the 19th day of November, 2021.
s/ Carlton W. Reeves
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?