United States Eleventh Circuit

Defendant's convictions for making a false statement in connection with the acquisition of a firearm, and for possessing a firearm while subject to a protective order, are affirmed where: 1) a conviction under 18 U.S.C. section 922(g)(8) did not require that the precise language found in subsection (C)(ii) must be used in a protective order for it to qualify under the statute; 2) the district court's prohibition of irrelevant evidence complied with Fed. R. Evid. 402 and was not clear error; and 3) defendant could not challenge the validity of the underlying protective order as a means of collaterally attacking his 18 U.S.C. section 922(g)(8) prosecution.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/01/2010
• Published 03/01/2010

Judges

Court

• United States Eleventh Circuit

Counsel