Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. Curington
Citation: 88 F. App'x 549Docket: No. 03-3156
Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; March 1, 2004; Federal Appellate Court
Michquel Curington appeals his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) by possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. At sentencing, the court applied a two-level increase in the base offense level under Guideline § 2K2.1(b)(4) due to the firearm being stolen. Curington contends that the enhancement violates his Fifth Amendment due process rights since there was no proof of his knowledge that the firearm was stolen, arguing that the guideline allows for enhancement without proving scienter. He acknowledges that this argument contradicts existing precedent from the Third Circuit, specifically United States v. Mobley, 956 F.2d 450 (3d Cir. 1992), which determined that the lack of a scienter requirement in the sentencing enhancement does not violate due process. Curington requests re-evaluation of the Mobley decision, particularly the dissenting opinion of Judge Mansmann. However, the court clarifies that a panel cannot overturn prior decisions; only an en banc court can do so. Curington may seek en banc consideration if he wishes. The District Court's judgment is affirmed.