United States v. Dijuan Taylor

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 24-1993 _____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DIJUAN TAYLOR, Appellant ______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (D.C. No. 2:23-cr-00091-001) District Judge: Honorable Nora B. Fischer ______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) November 12, 2025

Before: RESTREPO, McKEE, and AMBRO, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 7, 2026) _____________________ OPINION ______________________ McKEE, Circuit Judge.

 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.

I.

Dijuan Taylor appeals from the District Court’s judgment of sentence, arguing that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment facially and as applied to him.1 However, Taylor concedes that his arguments are foreclosed by our decisions in United States v. Moore and United States v. Quailes because he was on state probation at the time of his indictment.2 We agree.

II.

For the reasons discussed above, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment of sentence.