Skip to content
Name: People v. Ceja (2023) 94 Cal.App.5th 1296
Case #: G061609
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 08/30/2023

Law prohibiting felons from possessing ammunition (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1)) does not facially violate the Second Amendment as the right to bear arms only applies to law abiding citizens. A jury convicted defendant of being a felon in possession of ammunition. Defendant appealed arguing the statute facially violates the Second Amendment, relying on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022) 597 U.S. ___ [142 S.Ct. 2111]. Held: Affirmed. The court applied the two-step analysis articulated in People v. Alexander (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 469. “The first step is: When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.” “If the first step applies (the conduct is covered), the second step is: The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” per the analysis in Bruen. Here, the law prohibiting felons from possessing ammunition failed to get past the first step of the test; that is, the prohibited conduct is not covered by the Second Amendment as only law abiding citizens are included among “the people” whose right to bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment. Felons are not law abiding. Thus, the statute does not facially violate the Constitution.