USA v. Cordova
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
The Fifth Circuit affirmed Peter Villa Cordova’s conviction for possessing a firearm after a felony conviction in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Applying its post-Bruen precedent, the panel held that Cordova’s prior vehicular-evasion felony placed him within the historical tradition of disarming dangerous offenders, so § 922(g)(1) was constitutional as applied to him.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether, in an as-applied Second Amendment challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), a court is limited to examining the nature of the predicate felony conviction or may consider the defendant’s broader criminal history and characteristics to assess dangerousness.
Circuit Positions
Courts evaluating § 922(g)(1) as-applied Second Amendment challenges may consider ONLY the nature of the predicate felony; broader criminal history is irrelevant.
Courts may look BEYOND the predicate offense and assess the defendant’s whole criminal record and other characteristics to decide if the person is sufficiently dangerous to justify disarmament.
Conflict Summary
The Fifth Circuit adheres to its Diaz/Kimble line of precedent, restricting the inquiry to the statutory predicate felony itself when evaluating a felon-in-possession’s Second Amendment challenge. The Third and Sixth Circuits, by contrast, hold that courts may look beyond the specific predicate conviction and consider the defendant’s entire criminal record and other characteristics in deciding whether lifetime disarmament is permissible. Thus the circuits disagree on the permissible scope of evidence and analysis in § 922(g)(1) as-applied challenges after Bruen.