United States v. Jorge Ponce-Cortes ( 2014 )

Case: 12-14416 Date Filed: 07/31/2014 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-14416
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-20811-WPD-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JORGE PONCE-CORTES,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(July 31, 2014)
Before TJOFLAT, PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-14416 Date Filed: 07/31/2014 Page: 2 of 3
Jorge Ponce-Cortes appeals his conviction for possession of firearms and
ammunition by a convicted felon. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Ponce-Cortes
challenges the denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal. We affirm.
Ponce-Cortes challenges the denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal
on two grounds, both of which are foreclosed by our precedents. First, Ponce-
Cortes argues, for the first time, that his firearms and ammunition were not “in or
affecting commerce” when they were discovered in his bedroom, but a convicted
felon violates section 922(g)(1) if the firearm or ammunition that he possesses
traveled previously in interstate commerce, see United States v. Scott, 263 F.3d
1270, 1273–74 (11th Cir. 2001); United States v. McAllister, 77 F.3d 387, 390
(11th Cir. 1996). Ponce-Cortes violated section 922(g)(1) because the two
firearms and ammunition that he possessed had been manufactured in foreign
countries, Connecticut, Illinois, and Mississippi and necessarily traveled in
interstate commerce to reach him in Florida. See United States v. Wright, 607 F.3d
708, 715–16 (11th Cir. 2010). Second, Ponce-Cortes argues that section 922(g)(1)
impermissibly infringes on his right to bear a firearm under the Second
Amendment, but “statutes disqualifying felons from possessing a firearm under
any and all circumstances do not offend the Second Amendment,” United States v.
Rozier, 598 F.3d 768, 771 (11th Cir. 2010) (discussing District of Columbia v.
Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 626, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 2816–17 (2008)).
2
Case: 12-14416 Date Filed: 07/31/2014 Page: 3 of 3
We AFFIRM the denial of Ponce-Cortes’s motion for a judgment of
acquittal.
3