eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 2021-09

United States v. Pleasant ( 2021 )


Menu:
 
  • Case: 20-50649      Document: 00516014571         Page: 1     Date Filed: 09/15/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit                                United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
September 15, 2021
No. 20-50649
Summary Calendar                          Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Aaron Christopher Pleasant,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 7:19-CR-264-1
Before Higginbotham, Duncan, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Aaron Christopher Pleasant pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm
after a felony conviction. Relying on the analysis set forth in United States v.
Lopez,
    514 U.S. 549
     (1995), Pleasant argues that
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1), the
statute of conviction, exceeds the scope of Congress’s power under the
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-50649       Document: 00516014571         Page: 2    Date Filed: 09/15/2021
No. 20-50649
Commerce Clause and is thus unconstitutional. He concedes that his claim
is foreclosed by circuit precedent, and he raises the issue to preserve it for
further review.    The Government has filed an unopposed motion for
summary affirmance and an alternative request for an extension of time to file
its brief.
The court pretermits the question of the timeliness of the notice of
appeal. See United States v. Martinez,
    496 F.3d 387
    , 388-89 (5th Cir. 2007).
Summary affirmance is proper if “the position of one of the parties is
clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as
to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis,
    406 F.2d 1158
    ,
1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Pleasant’s instant challenge to the constitutionality of
§ 922(g)(1) is foreclosed. See United States v. Alcantar,
    733 F.3d 143
    , 145-46
(5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Daugherty,
    264 F.3d 513
    , 518 (5th Cir. 2001);
United States v. De Leon,
    170 F.3d 494
    , 499 (5th Cir. 1999).
Thus, the Government’s unopposed motion for summary affirmance
is GRANTED. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of
time to file an appellate brief is DENIED. The district court’s judgment is
AFFIRMED.
2