United States v. James David Brailey, Jr.

Good Law
408 F.3d 609·2005 WL 1175928·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 9039
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 200504-30083California1,483 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

James David Brailey appeals his conditional guilty plea conviction for being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(9). Brailey stands convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence that would qualify him as a prohibited person. He nevertheless maintains he comes within the federal statute’s exception for persons convicted of misdemeanors who have had their “civil rights restored.” See 18 U.S.C. § 921 (a) (3 3) (B) (ii). He claims that his rights have been “restored” because the Utah statutes, as amended in 2000, provide that persons convicted of misdemeanors are no longer prevented from possessing a firearm under Utah state law. See Utah Code Ann. § 76-10-503 (2004).

We agree with the district court that the state statutory amendment did not “restore” Brailey’s “civil rights” within the meaning of the federal law. We therefore affirm the conviction.

The background is not complicated. Brailey was originally convicted of aggravated assault in the third degree, a felony under Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-103 (2004). His guilty plea admitted he assaulted his wife. An assault against a co-habitant comes within the Utah definition of a…

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.