Federal Felon In Possession Of A Firearm Charges
A firearm arrest can become a federal criminal case even when no one fired the weapon, no one was injured, and the firearm was not allegedly used to commit another crime. For someone with a qualifying felony conviction, simple possession of a gun or ammunition may expose that person to prosecution under federal law. These cases can arise after traffic stops, searches of homes, probation investigations, drug investigations, domestic disturbance calls, or encounters in which police discover a firearm in a vehicle. Federal prosecutors can seek substantial prison sentences, and a person’s prior criminal record can dramatically affect the sentencing range.
When we defend someone facing a federal felon-in-possession charge in Galveston County or Houston, we examine not only whether a firearm was discovered, but whether the government can lawfully prove possession, prohibited status, knowledge, and every other element required for a federal conviction.
Federal Law Prohibits Certain Felons From Possessing Firearms
The principal federal statute is 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). It generally makes it unlawful for a person who has been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year to possess, receive, ship, or transport a firearm or ammunition when the required connection to interstate or foreign commerce exists.
The statute is broader than many people expect. A person does not have to be carrying a handgun in a waistband or holding a rifle when police arrive. Federal prosecutors may attempt to establish either actual possession or constructive possession. Constructive possession cases often involve a firearm found in a house, automobile, bedroom, bag, closet, or other location that prosecutors claim was under the defendant’s control.
The interstate commerce element is also frequently easier for federal prosecutors to establish than defendants initially assume. If the firearm was manufactured in another state and later possessed in Texas, that interstate movement may supply the required federal connection. Federal courts have repeatedly recognized this jurisdictional basis for § 922(g) prosecutions.
The Government Must Prove Knowledge Of Felony Status
An important issue in these cases concerns what the accused knew at the time of possession. Following the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Rehaif v. United States, the government must prove that a defendant knew of the status that made firearm possession unlawful. In a § 922(g)(1) case, that generally means proving that the defendant knew that he or she had been convicted of an offense punishable by more than one year in prison.
The Fifth Circuit, which includes Texas, has applied this requirement by explaining that federal prosecutors must prove both knowing possession and knowledge of felony status. The government does not ordinarily have to prove that the defendant knew the federal statute itself prohibited firearm possession. A claim that someone did not understand federal gun law is therefore different from a legitimate factual dispute about whether the person actually knew of the qualifying conviction or prohibited status.
In many cases, prosecutors attempt to prove knowledge through previous prison sentences, plea records, judgments, probation documents, prior firearm warnings, or other evidence showing that the accused knew about the felony conviction. We examine that evidence closely rather than assuming the government can establish this element merely because a firearm was recovered.
Federal Law And Texas Law Are Not The Same
One of the most dangerous misunderstandings in Texas involves the difference between state and federal firearm law.
Texas Penal Code § 46.04 prohibits firearm possession by a person convicted of a felony during the period beginning after conviction and continuing until the fifth anniversary of the person’s release from confinement or release from community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision, whichever occurs later. After that period, Texas law permits firearm possession only at the premises where the person lives. A violation of § 46.04(a) is generally a third-degree felony.
Federal law is different. The limited Texas provision allowing certain firearm possession at a person’s residence after the five-year period does not itself eliminate the federal prohibition under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The Texas State Law Library specifically warns that Texas and federal law differ on this issue and that federal law does not contain the same five-year home-possession provision.
That distinction matters greatly. Someone may believe that enough time has passed under Texas law and that keeping a firearm at home is lawful, yet still face a federal investigation or indictment. We therefore evaluate both bodies of law whenever prior convictions and firearms intersect.
A Federal Felon In Possession Conviction Can Carry Up To 15 Years
The potential federal sentence is severe. Under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(8), a person who knowingly violates § 922(g) can be fined and imprisoned for up to 15 years. Congress increased this statutory maximum from the former 10-year limit, so older information stating that every ordinary felon-in-possession charge carries no more than 10 years is outdated.
The statutory maximum does not mean every defendant receives 15 years. Federal sentencing involves several additional calculations, including the United States Sentencing Guidelines, the nature of prior convictions, characteristics of the firearm, the number of firearms involved, whether ammunition was involved, and whether prosecutors allege that the weapon was connected to another felony.
The federal sentencing process can therefore become one of the most important stages of the case. Two defendants charged under the same statute can face very different guideline ranges because their histories and alleged conduct differ.
Prior Convictions Can Dramatically Increase The Sentence
Prior criminal history deserves particular attention in a federal firearm case. The United States Sentencing Guidelines address unlawful firearm possession primarily through U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1. The guideline contains different base offense levels depending on factors such as qualifying prior convictions and the type of firearm involved.
For example, prior felony convictions involving crimes of violence or controlled substance offenses may substantially increase the applicable offense level. Certain weapon characteristics can also affect the calculation. The 2025 Guidelines Manual continues to use § 2K2.1 for unlawful possession, receipt, and transportation of firearms and ammunition.
This means the defense must study the prior record carefully. The title of an old conviction does not always answer whether it qualifies for a federal sentencing enhancement. The statute of conviction, elements of the prior offense, available court records, and controlling federal decisions can all matter.
The Armed Career Criminal Act Can Create A 15-Year Mandatory Minimum
Some cases become substantially more serious under the Armed Career Criminal Act, commonly called the ACCA. Under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), a person convicted under § 922(g) who has three qualifying previous convictions for violent felonies, serious drug offenses, or a combination of the two, committed on different occasions, can face a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years in federal prison.
That is not merely a higher maximum sentence. When the ACCA properly applies, the statute establishes a minimum term the court ordinarily cannot reduce below simply because a judge believes a shorter sentence would otherwise be appropriate. The statute also prevents probation for the § 922(g) conviction when the ACCA enhancement applies.
Whether prior convictions legally qualify is therefore a major defense issue. We do not assume that three prior felonies automatically create an ACCA case. The prior offenses must satisfy specific federal definitions, and the circumstances surrounding when those offenses occurred can matter.
Possession Does Not Always Mean The Gun Was In Someone’s Hand
Constructive possession is frequently contested in federal firearm cases. Imagine police stop a vehicle containing several occupants and discover a handgun underneath a seat. The presence of the firearm does not automatically prove which passenger possessed it.
Similar disputes arise when agents search a shared home. A gun may be discovered in a closet, garage, bedroom, cabinet, or common area accessible to several people. Prosecutors may rely on fingerprints, DNA, statements, photographs, text messages, ownership evidence, location data, or surrounding circumstances to argue that the accused exercised control over the firearm.
We examine who owned the location, who had access to it, where the weapon was found, whether another person claimed ownership, and whether forensic or digital evidence actually connects our client to the firearm. Constructive possession cannot simply be assumed because someone was nearby.
An Illegal Search Can Affect The Entire Federal Case
Federal firearm prosecutions frequently begin with a search or seizure, making Fourth Amendment issues central to the defense. Police may discover a firearm during a vehicle search, execution of a search warrant, search incident to arrest, probation search, or investigative detention.
We examine why law enforcement stopped the vehicle or approached the person in the first place. We also review whether officers had probable cause, whether consent was genuinely given, whether a warrant was sufficiently supported, and whether officers exceeded the lawful scope of a search.
If officers obtained the firearm through an unconstitutional search, the defense may seek suppression of the evidence. When the firearm itself is critical to the prosecution, a successful suppression motion can significantly change the government’s ability to proceed.
Statements To Police Can Become Critical Evidence
People sometimes hurt their defense by attempting to explain why a gun was present. A statement such as “I was only holding it for someone,” “I forgot it was in the car,” or “I keep it for protection” may later be used as evidence of possession or knowledge.
Federal agents and local officers are trained to obtain statements that can strengthen an investigation. An apparently casual conversation can become evidence in an indictment and later at trial.
When we become involved early, we can evaluate whether statements were lawfully obtained, whether Miranda protections applied, and whether the government is interpreting an ambiguous statement more broadly than the surrounding facts justify.
Federal Firearm Charges Require A Detailed Defense Strategy
A federal felon-in-possession accusation should never be reduced to the simple question of whether police found a gun. We examine how the firearm was discovered, who controlled the location, whether possession can actually be established, whether our client knew of the relevant prohibited status, whether the firearm satisfies the federal jurisdictional requirement, and whether constitutional violations occurred during the investigation.
We also study the client’s prior criminal record before sentencing becomes an issue. That work can identify disputed guideline enhancements or an improper attempt to classify prior convictions under the ACCA. Federal cases move under different rules and procedures than ordinary Texas state prosecutions, and early preparation can make a substantial difference in how the defense develops.
Galveston Federal Felon In Possession Defense Attorneys At Mark Diaz & Associates
Federal firearm charges can place years of a person’s freedom at risk. A § 922(g) prosecution can carry up to 15 years in federal prison, and certain qualifying prior convictions can create even more serious sentencing consequences under the Armed Career Criminal Act. When we defend these cases, we examine the search, the alleged possession, the firearm evidence, our client’s statements, prior convictions, sentencing enhancements, and every other issue that can affect guilt or punishment.
Mark Diaz & Associates represents clients facing serious criminal accusations in Galveston and throughout the City of Houston, Texas. We understand that a federal firearm investigation requires immediate attention because statements, search issues, prior convictions, and sentencing questions can shape the case long before a trial occurs.
When you hire me, you work directly with me. My clients have my personal cell phone number because questions, emergencies, and concerns don’t always happen during business hours. You won’t be handed off to a junior associate or lost in a system where your case is one of dozens on a crowded docket. From arrest through resolution, I remain personally involved and accessible.
If you are under investigation or have been charged with federal felon in possession of a firearm, contact our Galveston criminal defense lawyer at Mark Diaz & Associates today by calling 409-515-6170 to schedule your free consultation. We represent clients in Galveston and throughout Houston, Texas, and we are prepared to examine the government’s evidence, protect your constitutional rights, and build a defense based on the specific facts of your case.
