U.S. v. Folen, 95-3496
| Decision Date | 04 June 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 95-3496,95-3496 |
| Citation | 84 F.3d 1103 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Joseph William FOLEN, IV, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Omar F. Green, II, Little Rock, AR, for Appellant.
Clarence Daniel Stripling, Little Rock, AR, for Appellee.
Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
Joseph William Folen, IV, appeals his conviction following his conditional guilty plea to conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C. § 842(i), which prohibits felons from possessing explosives that have travelled in interstate commerce. We affirm.
Folen and a friend broke into a storage shed at a quarry in Pulaski County, Arkansas, and stole explosives. After his arrest, Folen pleaded guilty to an information charging him with conspiring "to possess explosives which had been shipped or transported in interstate commerce." Having reserved his right to challenge the constitutionality of section 842(i), Folen moved the court to dismiss the information, citing United States v. Lopez, --- U.S. ----, ----, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 1634, 131 L.Ed.2d 626 (1995). The district court 1 rejected Folen's challenge and sentenced him to sixty months imprisonment and three years of supervised release.
On appeal, Folen argues that Congress has exceeded its power under the Commerce Clause by continuing to regulate indefinitely the possession of explosives after they have crossed state lines; and that his conduct, which occurred entirely within Pulaski County, constituted a local offense and did not substantially affect interstate commerce.
The constitutionality of a statute is a legal question we review de novo. United States v. Monteleone, 77 F.3d 1086, 1091 (8th Cir.1996).
Section 842(i)(1) makes it unlawful for a felon to "possess any explosive which has been shipped or transported in interstate ... commerce." We hold that section 842(i)(1) is constitutional because its express jurisdictional element ensures that it regulates only the possession of explosives that have travelled in interstate commerce. Cf. United States v. Bates, 77 F.3d 1101, 1104 (8th Cir.1996) (). The interstate nexus is not dependent upon a defendant's personal interstate transportation of the explosives he possessed. Cf. United States v. Shelton, 66...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Constitutionality of The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act
... ... 909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes ... Prevention Act. In particular, you have asked us to review ... section 7(a) of S. 909, which would amend title 18 of the ... United States Code to ... U.S.C.A. § 2252(a)(4)(B) (West Supp. 2000) ... See, e.g ... United States v. Folen, 84 F.3d 1103, ... 1104 (8th Cir. 1996) (§ 842(i)); Fraternal Order of ... Police v. United ... ...
-
U.S. v. Winningham
...of permissible regulation, under the Commerce Clause.13 See, e.g., United States v. McMasters, supra at 1398; United States v. Folen, 84 F.3d 1103, 1104 (8th Cir.1996); United States v. Robinson, 62 F.3d 234, 236-37 (8th Cir.1995); United States v. Mosby, 60 F.3d 454, 456 n. (8th Cir.1995),......
-
U.S. v. Wall
...Cir.1996) (upholding 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), which prohibits the use of a firearm while engaged in drug trafficking); United States v. Folen, 84 F.3d 1103 (8th Cir.1996) (upholding 18 U.S.C. § 842(i), which prohibits felons from possessing explosives); United States v. Lomayaoma, 86 F.3d 142......
-
United States v. Beckham
...of a jurisdictional element defeated defendant's challenge to a felon-in-possession of firearm statute); see also United States v. Folen, 84 F.3d 1103, 1104 (8th Cir. 1996) (holding express jurisdictional element was sufficient to ensure constitutionality of federal law prohibiting felons f......