United States v. Robbie Catchings

facts, we do not recount them here. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291

and 18 U.S.C. § 3742. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

1. Catchings argues his conviction must be overturned under Rehaif v.

United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191, 2194 (2019), which requires that the Government

“show that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and also that he knew he

had the relevant status [under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)] when he possessed it” to convict

a person for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(a). It is undisputed that the jury was not

instructed that it had to find, and the Government was not required to prove, that

Catchings knew his prohibited status as a felon at the time of the offense. “A jury

instruction that omits an element of the offense is reviewed for plain error if the

defendant failed to object in the district court.” United States v. Johnson, 979 F.3d

632, 636 (9th Cir. 2020); Greer v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 2090, 2096-97 (2021)

(applying plain error review to an unpreserved Rehaif claim).

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Greer forecloses relief because

Catchings did not meet the requirements of plain error review. To establish…