data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0276e/0276e81e2aa83cdde0b40f43385fa4dd8b8606c7" alt="Link"
On appeal, Mahin raised two arguments. First, he argued that the convictions violated his rights under the Second Amendment. The Fourth Circuit rejected that argument, holding both that no court had yet held that citizens had any Second Amendment right outside the home and that, even if Mahin's conduct fell within Second Amendment protections, the statute survives intermediate scrutiny when applied to him (relying largely on its recent decision in Chapman). The specific facts of Mahin's possession did not change that result. Second, Mahin argued that the district court erred by sentencing him on two counts for the simultaneous possession of a firearm and ammunition. The court agreed and, applying plain error review, vacated the ammunition possession count, and remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
No comments:
Post a Comment