## Facts

- Robert Wilson Stewart, Jr. sold “parts kits” for .50-caliber rifles, believing they were lawful because the receivers were not fully machined.
- After learning Stewart had a prior machine-gun-related conviction, the ATF investigated.
- An undercover ATF agent bought a kit and concluded it could be “readily” converted into a firearm for federal statutory purposes.
- Agents obtained a warrant, searched Stewart’s home, and found 31 firearms, including five machine guns Stewart had machined and assembled.
- Stewart was convicted of one count of felon in possession of firearms (18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2)) and five counts of unlawful possession of a machine gun (18 U.S.C. § 922(o)).
- Stewart sought suppression of the search evidence and requested a Franks evidentiary hearing; the district court denied the request.
- In an earlier appeal, the Ninth Circuit vacated the § 922(o) convictions on Commerce Clause grounds; the Supreme Court vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of Gonzales v. Raich.

## Issues

1. Whether, after Gonzales v. Raich, Congress may prohibit intrastate possession of homemade machine guns under the Commerce Clause through 18 U.S.C. § 922(o).
2. Whether 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(o) and 922(g)(1) violate the Second Amendment.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying a Franks hearing and admitting evidence seized under the warrant.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit held that, in light of Raich, § 922(o) is a valid exercise of Congress’s Commerce Clause power as applied to Stewart’s intrastate possession of homemade machine guns.
- The court rejected Stewart’s Second Amendment challenges to § 922(o) and § 922(g)(1) under then-controlling circuit precedent.
- The court affirmed denial of a Franks hearing because Stewart failed to make the required substantial preliminary showing of a deliberate or reckless falsehood material to probable cause.
- The court affirmed Stewart’s convictions, including reinstating the § 922(o) counts.

## Legal Principles

- Congress may regulate purely intrastate activity under the Commerce Clause when it is an essential part of a broader regulatory scheme governing interstate commerce and excluding the intrastate class would undercut the scheme’s effectiveness.
- In assessing Commerce Clause authority under a comprehensive federal regime, Congress may rationally treat intrastate homemade items as part of a fungible class that can enter the interstate market.
- Under the governing circuit precedent at the time, federal prohibitions on machine-gun possession and felon firearm possession did not violate the Second Amendment.
- A defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing only upon a substantial preliminary showing that the affidavit contained a knowingly or recklessly false statement (or omission) necessary to probable cause; ambiguity or incompleteness alone is insufficient.

## Conclusion

On remand after Raich, the Ninth Circuit upheld federal authority to ban intrastate possession of homemade machine guns as part of a comprehensive firearms regulatory scheme, rejected Second Amendment challenges under then-binding precedent, and affirmed the search based on the absence of a sufficient Franks showing.


United States v. Stewart, 451 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2006)