|
|
Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980)
Lewis v. United States No. 78-1595 Argued January 7, 1980 Decided February 27, 1980 445 U.S. 55
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Held: Even though petitioner’s extant prior state court felony conviction may be subject to collateral attack under Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, it could properly be used as a predicate for his subsequent conviction for possession of a firearm in violation of § 1202(a)(1) of Title VII of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. Pp. 60-68.
(a) The plain meaning of § 1202(a)(1)’s sweeping language proscribing the possession of firearms by any person who "has been convicted by a court of the United States or of a State . . . of a felony," is that the fact of a felony conviction imposes firearm disability until the conviction is vacated or the felon is relieved of his disability by some affirmative action. Other provisions of the statute demonstrate and reinforce its broad sweep, and there is nothing in § 1202(a)(1)’s legislative history to suggest that Congress was willing to allow a defendant to question the validity of his prior conviction as a defense to a charge under § 1202(a)(1). Moreover, the fact that there are remedies available to a convicted felon -- removal of the firearm disability by a qualifying pardon or the Secretary of the Treasury’s consent, as specified in the Act, or a challenge to the prior conviction in an appropriate court proceeding -- suggests that Congress intended that the defendant clear his status before obtaining a firearm, thereby fulfilling Congress’ purpose to keep firearms away from persons classified as potentially irresponsible and dangerous. Pp. 60-65.
(b) The firearm regulatory scheme at issue here is consonant with the concept of equal protection embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, since Congress could rationally conclude that any felony conviction, even an allegedly invalid one, is a sufficient basis on which to prohibit the possession of a firearm. And use of an uncounseled felony conviction as the basis for imposing a civil firearms disability, enforceable by criminal sanction, is not inconsistent with Burgett v. Texas, 389 U.S. 109; United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443; and Loper v. Beto, 405 U.S. 473. Pp. 65-67.
591 F.2d 978, affirmed.
BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and STEWART, WHITE, REHNQUIST, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL and POWELL, JJ., joined, post, p. 68.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980) in 445 U.S. 55 445 U.S. 56. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=A1JQJET4JYWZKTM.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980), in 445 U.S. 55, page 445 U.S. 56. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=A1JQJET4JYWZKTM.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980). cited in 1980, 445 U.S. 55, pp.445 U.S. 56. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=A1JQJET4JYWZKTM.
|