United States v. Revuelto
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Revuelto contends that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)’s prohibition of firearm and ammunition possession is an unconstitutional exertion of the government’s power to regulate interstate commerce, as applied to Revuelto’s intra-state possession of a firearm and ammunition.
This argument, however, was previously rejected by this court in United States v. Hanna, 55 F.3d 1456 (9th Cir. 1995), and again in United States v. Rousseau, 257 F.3d 925 (9th Cir. 2001). See United States v. Paopao, 469 F.3d 760, 767-68 (9th Cir. 2006).
Accordingly, the district court properly denied Revuelto’s motion to dismiss, and we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- United States v. Daniel K. REVUELTO
- Status
- Published