## Facts

- Richard A. Scarborough had a prior Virginia felony conviction for possession of narcotics with intent to distribute.
- During execution of a narcotics search warrant, officers seized four firearms from Scarborough’s bedroom.
- The federal government charged Scarborough with receipt and possession of firearms by a convicted felon under 18 U.S.C. app. § 1202(a)(1), which applied to firearms received, possessed, or transported “in commerce or affecting commerce.”
- At trial, the government presented evidence that each seized firearm had previously traveled in interstate commerce.
- The jury acquitted Scarborough on the receipt count but convicted him on the possession count.
- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction, and the Supreme Court granted review to determine the scope of the statute’s commerce element.

## Issues

1. Under 18 U.S.C. app. § 1202(a)(1), does the “in commerce or affecting commerce” element require proof that the defendant’s firearm possession had a contemporaneous connection to interstate commerce?
2. Is it sufficient to prove only that the firearm had moved in interstate commerce at some time in the past, even if that movement occurred before the defendant became a convicted felon?

## Decision

- The Court affirmed the conviction.
- Proof that the firearm had previously traveled in interstate commerce satisfied the statute’s “in commerce or affecting commerce” requirement for felon-in-possession.
- The required commerce nexus need not be contemporaneous with the defendant’s possession and is not defeated because the firearm’s interstate movement predated the defendant’s felony conviction.
- Justice Stewart dissented; Justice Rehnquist did not participate.

## Legal Principles

- For § 1202(a)(1), Congress required only a minimal interstate-commerce nexus: that the firearm had been, at any time, an article of interstate commerce.
- The “in commerce or affecting commerce” language in this context does not impose a temporal requirement linking interstate movement to the moment of possession.
- Legislative purpose to restrict firearm possession by convicted felons supported a broad construction that avoided narrowing the statute through an unstated contemporaneity limitation.

## Conclusion

The Court held that, for the federal felon-in-possession offense in § 1202(a)(1), the government meets the commerce element by showing the firearm previously moved across state lines, without proving any present or contemporaneous connection between the defendant’s possession and interstate commerce.


Scarborough v. United States, 431 U.S. 563 (1977)