U.S. v. Cook

Ct. of Appeals rejected defendant’s claim that his conviction on charge of being unlawful user of controlled substance in possession of firearm was unconstitutional, even though defendant claimed that term “unlawful user” found in 18 USC section 922(g)(3) was unconstitutionally vague, or that statute’s ban on possession of firearm by unlawful user of controlled substance impermissibly burdens defendant’s Second Amendment rights. It also rejected defendant’s claim that Dist. Ct. had failed to properly instruct jury on who constitutes “unlawful user” of controlled substances. However, defendant was entitled to new trial under Rehaif, 139 S.Ct. 2191, where: (1) govt. was required to show that defendant knew not only that he possessed firearm, but that he belonged to relevant category of person barred from possessing firearm; (2) instant indictment did not allege and jury instructions did not advise jury that it must find that defendant knew he was unlawful user of controlled substances; and (3) there was reasonable probability that outcome of trial might have been different had govt. been required to prove that defendant knew he was unlawful user of marijuana.