USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________

No. 96-1692

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

DAVID LYNWOOD BOWDEN, JR.,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion

of this court issued

on October 28,

1996 is amen

as follows:

On page

2,

"interrelated."

line 6,

correct

the

spelling of

"inerrelated"

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 96-1692

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

DAVID LYNWOOD BOWDEN, JR.,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]

___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge,

___________
Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

Brett D. Baber and Rudman & Winchell on brief for appellant.

______________
_________________
Jay P. McCloskey, United States
_________________

Attorney, James L. McCarthy

__________________

Margaret D. McGaughey, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief

_____________________
appellee.

____________________

October 28, 1996

____________________

Per Curiam.
___________

David

conviction for unlawful

in

violation

of 18

27.1.

Bowden

appeals from

possession of a firearm by

U.S.C.

government has moved for

R.

L.

922(g)(1)

his

a felon,

and 924(e).

The

summary affirmance pursuant to Loc.

We grant the government's motion for the following

reasons.

Bowden makes three

he

contends

that

922(g)

interrelated arguments.

is

unconstitutional under

First

the

reasoning

"This

of United States v. Lopez, 115 S. Ct. 1624 (1995).

_____________
_____

issue

is no

longer open

States v.
______

Joost, 92 F.3d
_____

remaining

arguments are

possession

of the

interstate

commerce, and

7, 14

that

in

this circuit."

(1st Cir. 1996).

922(g) requires

firearm had

that

a "substantial

the

No. 95-1093,

slip op. at

1996), we rejected precisely

Bowden's

proof that

effect" upon

jury instructions

flawed for not including that requirement.

v. Blais,
_____

United
______

In

were

United States
_____________

8 (1st Cir.

August 28,

the arguments that Bowden makes

here "about Lopez's alteration of the Scarborough standard of

_____
___________

minimal nexus."

Bowden's conviction is summarily affirmed. See Loc.

_________ ________ ___

R. 27.1.

-2-