United States v. Henry Standing Elk, Jr.

Good Law
581 F. App'x 649
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 27, 201411-30323California244 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Henry Thomas Standing Elk, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction for failure to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Standing Elk first argues that the district court should have dismissed the indictment because Montana had not implemented SORNA at the time of his offense. This argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Elk Shoulder, 738 F.3d 948, 954-55 (9th Cir.2013), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 1920 , 188 L.Ed.2d 944 (2014) (enforcement of SORNA is not dependent on a state’s implementation of the administrative portion of SORNA); United States v. Elkins, 683 F.3d 1039, 1046 (9th Cir.2012) (same).

Standing Elk next argues that Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to require him to register. This argument is also foreclosed. See United States v. Kebodeaux, — U.S.-,-, 133 S.Ct. 2496, 2500 , 186 L.Ed.2d 540 (2013) (concluding that “the Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress adequate power to enact SORNA and to apply it” to a defendant…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.