United States v. Alex Ibarra

MEMORANDUM.

We affirm the conviction of Alex TorresIbarra (“Torres”) for twenty-one charges of Aiding and Abetting False Statements During Purchase of Firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924 (a)(1)(A) and 2(a), and one count of Engaging in the Business of Dealing Firearms without a License, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (a)(1)(A) and 924(a)(1)(D).

The district court had jurisdiction over violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924 (a)(1)(A) and 922(a)(1)(A), whether or not an interstate commerce nexus is alleged or included in the text of the statute. See Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 17 , 125 S.Ct. 2195 , 162 L.Ed.2d 1 (2005); Huddleston v. United States, 415 U.S. 814, 833 , 94 S.Ct. 1262 , 39 L.Ed.2d 782 (1974). In addition, the interstate commerce nexus is not an element required to be charged for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (a)(1)(A). United States v. Redus, 469 F.2d 185, 187-88 (9th Cir.1972).

The clear and detailed statutory and regulatory requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a)(1)(A) are not unconstitutionally vague. See United States v. Jae Gab Kim, 449 F.3d 933, 942 (9th Cir.2006). These requirements apply to the false representations Torres aided and abetted in this case.

The…