NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 24-1977 ____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DEONDRE STEAVE, Appellant ____________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (D.C. No. 2:23-cr-00093-001) District Judge: Honorable Christy Criswell Wiegand ____________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) July 11, 2025 ____________ Before: KRAUSE, MATEY, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges (Filed: September 18, 2025) ____________ OPINION * ____________ PHIPPS, Circuit Judge.

On February 4, 2022, after serving a 46-month prison sentence for being a felon in knowing possession of a firearm, see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), Deondre Steave began a three- year term of supervised release. Within two months, however, he violated one of the conditions of his supervised release. After he violated the supervised-release conditions

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. on several more occasions, a warrant was issued for his arrest. The marshals who executed that warrant on March 27, 2023, found a handgun and ammunition on his person. Steave was then charged with a single count of being a felon in knowing possession of a firearm.

See id. In the District Court, he moved to dismiss the indictment on Second Amendment grounds, arguing that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to him. In exercising jurisdiction over the case, see id. § 3231, the District Court denied the motion. Through this appeal, Steave now invokes this Court’s jurisdiction to renew those challenges, see 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which are reviewed de novo, see United States v. Stock, 728 F.3d 287, 291 (3d Cir. 2013).

Steave’s arguments are foreclosed by binding precedent. In United States v. Moore, 111 F.4th 266 (3d Cir. 2024), this Court rejected facial and as-applied challenges to § 922(g)(1) for persons on supervised release. See id. at 273 & n.5. Thus, the judgment of the District Court will be affirmed.