Voisine V. United States Case Study

321 Words1 Page

Case: Voisine v. United States (2016) Facts: Voisine argues that previous domestic violence convictions should not affect his ability to own a gun, after being the main suspect in the shooting of a bald eagle, alerting officers that he owned a rifle. A background check later revealed prior domestic violence convictions, allowing officers to charge him in violation of § 922(g)(9). The District Court disagreed with Voisine, ending in a guilty plea on his part, on the right that he could appeal the District Court’s ruling. Voisine then filed joint certiorari with William Armstrong, after he was also charged in violation of § 922(g)(9), to the U.S Supreme Court Argument: Should misdemeanor assault convictions for reckless (as compared to intentionality

Open Document