Public Defense

US v. Qazi, No. 18-10483 (9-17-20)(Hunsaker w/Cook & Wardlaw). The defendant, pro se, challenges the indictment charging him as a prohibited possessor of a firearm for failure to contain an essential element. The 9^thagrees that under Rehaif v US, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019)(knowledge of felony status), the indictment omitted the knowledge requirement. Under circuit precedent, US v. Du Bo, 186 F.3d 1177 (9^th Cir. 1999), the indictment must be dismissed as structural error. The 9^th comments that the defendant, proceeding pro se, challenged the statute pre-Rehaif broadly for failing to state all the elements. If he had counsel, the challenge would likely not have occurred under precedent. Who knows? The pro se challenge was broad, and because it is pro se, needs to be liberally construed.

This opinion notes (n.1) that the 9^th?s structural error Du Bo rule conflicts with other circuits, which employ a harmless analysis.

The decision is here:

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/09/17/18-10483.pdf

Full post as published by Ninth Circuit Blog on September 17, 2020 (boomark / email).