Criminal Defense Lawyers

Federal Felon in Possession Charges: 18 USC 922(g) Defense

You just found out the federal government is coming after you for having a gun—and your head is spinning with questions about prison time, you’re rights, and whether there’s any way out of this. Look, here’s the thing—this article delivers exactly what you need right now: the real sentences people actually face, which defenses work in 2025, the constitutional challenges which changed everything, and what to do RIGHT NOW. Federal gun charges ain’t like state charges—the rules are different, the prosecutors doesn’t mess around, and the mandatory minimums are real. We’ve handled many, many of these cases, and I’m gonna walk you through what you’re actually facing based off real USSC data from FY 2024.

What You’re Actually Facing: The Real Numbers on Federal Gun Charges

First question everyone asks: how much time am I looking at? The answer—well, it depends, but let me give you the real numbers so your not flying blind here. Under 18 USC 922(g)(1), if you was convicted of a felony punishable by more then one year and you possessed a firearm or ammunition, your facing up to 10 years in federal prison. That’s the maximum. But here’s what actually happens in the real world, based off recent DOJ cases: the average sentence in FY 2024 was 71 months—that’s almost 6 years. Not the maximum, but not a slap on the wrist neither.

Now, if the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) applies—and we’ll get into that later because its complicated—you’re looking at a mandatory minimum of 15 years. No discretion for the judge. Fifteen years minimum, period. The prosecutors love ACCA because it takes away any negotiating power you might of had. I seen cases where someone was looking at 5-6 years suddenly facing 15 because they had three prior convictions that qualified. The difference between 6 years and 15 years—that’s you’re entire life changing.

Here’s something most lawyers won’t tell you: geography matters enormously. Like, way more than you think. Based off USSC data, sentencing disparities between districts exceeds 34%. If you’re prosecuted in the Northern District of Iowa, you might see departure rates of 34.9% under Early Disposition Programs. If your in another district? You might get the full guideline sentence. It’s the same crime, same statute, but where you get prosecuted changes everything. This isn’t fair—but it’s real, and you need to know it.

Another thing: 33.6% of defendants recieve downward variances, with an average sentence reduction of 34.7%. That means if you got the right lawyer and the right facts, theres a real chance of getting significantly less time then the guidelines recommend. But—and this is important—you need someone whose gonna fight for those variances, not just show up and let the prosecutor run the show. Real talk.

Is This Law Even Constitutional Anymore? The Post-Bruen Revolution

Okay so this is where things get intresting—and this is stuff most websites don’t cover because their either outdated or they don’t understand the constitutional landscape. In June 2022, the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which changed everything about gun rights cases. The Court said when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers someones conduct, the government has to justify it’s regulation by showing its consistent with America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Not just any justification—historical tradition.

Then in June 2024—just last year—the Supreme Court decided United States v. Rahimi. Chief Justice Roberts writing for the majority clarified that courts don’t need a “historical twin” to modern gun laws. The regulation just needs to be “relevantly similar” to historical regulations addressing comparable concerns. That might sound like a small distinction, but its huge for 922(g) challenges. The Court found that since the founding, firearm laws included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm from misusing firearms—which supports disarming dangerous persons.

But here’s where it gets real interesting: not every felon is dangerous. Like, if you was convicted of welfare fraud 20 years ago, are you really a threat? That’s the question courts are wrestling with now, and there’s a massive circuit split developing.

Actually, let me back up and explain this more clearly. In December 2024—literally just a few months ago—the Third Circuit sitting en banc decided Range v. Attorney General. Bryan Range pleaded guilty in 1995 to making a false statement to obtain food stamps. That conviction—welfare fraud, basically—disqualified him from possessing firearms under 922(g)(1) for life. The Third Circuit said that’s unconstitutional as applied to Bryan Range. They held there’s “no historical analogue for permanently disarming a citizen based off a prior conviction for food-stamp fraud.” This is groundbreaking. If your in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, or the Virgin Islands (the Third Circuit), and you have a non-violent felony, you might have a viable constitutional challenge right now.

The Sixth Circuit took a different approach in United States v. Williams (August 2024). They created what I call the “dangerousness framework”—three categories of felonies:

• Crimes against persons (murder, rape, assault, robbery) – directly show dangerousness, disarmament is constitutional
• Crimes posing significant danger (drug trafficking, burglary) – indirectly show danger to community
• Non-violent crimes (mail fraud, tax fraud, false statements) – may not justify disarmament

If you’re in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, or Tennessee (the Sixth Circuit), you can challenge 922(g) by proving you’re not dangerous—but the burden’s on you to prove it. That’s tough, but its better than no chance at all.

Meanwhile, the Fourth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have all held that 922(g)(1) is constitutional across the board, no exceptions. All felons can be categorically disarmed, period. So if your case is in one of those circuits, the constitutional challenge is basically dead on arrival—for now.

Here’s what this means for you: if you’re charged in the Third or Sixth Circuit and you have a non-violent felony, you got a real shot at mounting an as-applied constitutional challenge. Everywhere else? You’re gonna need a different defense strategy. This is why having a lawyer who understands the current constitutional landscape is critical—many, many attorneys are still operating like its 2020 and missing these opportunities entirely.

The Defenses That Actually Work in 2025

Alright, so lets talk about defenses that actually work—not the stuff you read on Reddit or hear from your cousin whose “really knowledgeable about the law.” I’m talking about defenses that federal judges actually recognize and that have gotten charges dismissed or reduced in real cases.

Constructive Possession Defense – This is probably you’re best shot if the gun wasn’t litterally on your person. Here’s the thing about constructive possession: the government has to prove you knew the gun was their and you had the ability and intent to exercise control over it. If the gun was in a shared residence, a car with multiple people, or anywhere that wasn’t exclusively yours, the burden shifts. Courts have said that when premises are in “joint, rather than exclusive, possession of a defendant, knowledge of the contraband’s presence and the ability to control it will not be inferred from the ownership but must be established by independant proof.”

What does that mean in English? It means if you lived with roomates and the gun was in a common area, the prosecutor can’t just say “well, you lived there so you possessed it.” They gotta prove you knew it was there AND you intended to control it. No fingerprints on the gun? No DNA? No statements saying it was yours? That’s reasonable doubt right there. I’ve seen cases dismissed because the government couldn’t meet this burden—they just assumed that because the defendant had access to the location, they possessed the firearm. That ain’t enough.

Rehaif Knowledge Defense – In 2019, the Supreme Court decided Rehaif v. United States, holding that the government must prove you knew you belonged to the category of persons prohibited from possessing firearms. Now, let me be real with you: prosecutors adapted to Rehaif real quick. Research shows that immediately after Rehaif, there was a significant decline in 922(g) charges—the decision prevented 2,365 convictions and eliminated 8,419 prison years during the first eight months. But prosecutors learned how to prove knowledge, and now they’re just as likely to secure convictions as before.

That said, their are narrow circumstances where Rehaif still works. If you genuinely didn’t know about your prior conviction—maybe it was expunged, or you was told it was reduced to a misdemeanor, or you recieved bad legal advice—you might have a Rehaif defense. The key is proving you didn’t know you was prohibited. If you checked “no” on the ATF Form 4473 when buying a gun because you honestly believed you weren’t a felon, that could support a Rehaif defense. But if you knew you was a felon and possessed a gun anyway, Rehaif doesn’t help you.

Fourth Amendment Violations – Did the police search you illegally? Did they stop you without reasonable suspicion? Did they enter you’re home without a warrant? If the evidence was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, it can be suppressed—meaning the government can’t use it against you. This comes up alot in traffic stops. The cop pulls you over for a minor traffic violation, then starts searching the car without your consent and without probable cause. If he finds a gun, and the search was illegal, that gun gets suppressed. Without the gun, the government don’t have no case.

Look, I’m not gonna lie to you—Fourth Amendment challenges are tough. Courts give police alot of leeway. But if the facts are on you’re side, its worth pursuing. We’ve had cases where the entire prosecution collapsed because the initial stop was pretextual or the search exceeded the scope of what was permitted. You gotta examine every single detail of how the police obtained the evidence.

Interstate Commerce Challenge – This is a long-shot defense, but its worth preserving for appeal. The government has to prove the firearm traveled in interstate commerce at some point. Usually, this is easy for them—virtually all firearms cross state lines at some point during manufacture or distribution. But some judges are questioning whether the “minimal nexus” standard from Scarborough v. United States survives modern Commerce Clause precedent after United States v. Lopez. If you’re gun was homemade or antique or there’s some other reason to believe it never crossed state lines, this could be a viable challenge. It’s never succeeded at the circuit level, but that doesn’t mean it won’t eventually reach the Supreme Court.

Bottom line: if someone tells you “there’s no defense to a felon in possession case,” they don’t know what they’re talking about. Their are real defenses. The question is whether the facts of your case support them.

The Armed Career Criminal Act – When 10 Years Becomes 15 (And Why This Is Your Biggest Problem)

Okay so here’s where things get really, really serious—and honestly, this is the part that keeps me up at night when I’m working on these cases because the consequences are so severe. The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) is basically a sentence enhancement that turns a 10-year maximum into a 15-year mandatory minimum. If ACCA applies to you, the judge has no discretion—zero—to go below 15 years. I don’t care how sympathetic you’re case is, I don’t care if you got 10 kids and you’ve been clean for 20 years, I don’t care if the gun was from 30 years ago that you didn’t even know was there—if ACCA applies, your getting 15 years minimum.

ACCA kicks in if you got three or more prior convictions for a “violent felony” or a “serious drug offense” committed on seperate occasions. That sounds simple, but let me tell you, the litigation over what qualifies as a “violent felony” and what counts as “seperate occasions” has been absoutely insane and has produced hundreds of court decisions and multiple Supreme Court cases because the stakes are so high for defendants and because prosecutors use ACCA so aggressively to force plea bargains. Let me break down what actually qualifies, because this is where many, many defendants get tripped up and end up facing 15 years when they thought they was only looking at maybe 5 or 6 years.

A “violent felony” includes crimes punishable by more then one year that either: (1) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against another person; or (2) is burglary, arson, extortion, or involves use of explosives; or (3) otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another. That third part—the “residual clause”—was actually struck down by the Supreme Court in Johnson v. United States (2015) as unconstitutionally vague, but the other two parts still apply. So if you got three convictions for things like robbery, aggravated assault, or burglary, ACCA probably applies. A “serious drug offense” means an offense involving drugs punishable by 10 years or more under federal law or state law.

Here’s where it gets tricky: in June 2024, the Supreme Court decided Brown v. United States, holding that a state drug conviction counts as an ACCA predicate if it involved a drug that was on the federal schedules at the time of that offense, even if the drug was later removed from the schedules. So if you was convicted of selling a drug that was Schedule I in 2010, but that drug was de-scheduled in 2020, it still counts as an ACCA predicate based off what the law was in 2010. This closed off a potential defense avenue that many defendants was hoping to use, and it means that even though marijuana laws have changed dramatically in recent years and certain other substances have been rescheduled or removed from the controlled substances act, if your prior conviction involved a scheduled drug at the time you commited the offense, it still counts for ACCA purposes irregardless of what the law is today.

Another huge development: in June 2024, the Supreme Court also decided Erlinger v. United States, holding that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require a unanimous jury to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether you’re past offenses was committed on seperate occasions for ACCA purposes. Before Erlinger, judges was making this determination, which meant defendants had less protections. Now, if the goverment wants to use ACCA against you, they gotta prove to a jury—unanimously, beyond a reasonable doubt—that you’re three prior convictions happened on different occasions. This gives you more procedural protections, but if the facts are clear that the offenses was seperate, it doesn’t help much.

Here’s a real example to show you how brutal ACCA is: lets say you was convicted of residential burglary in 2010, aggravated assault in 2012, and robbery in 2015. Now in 2025, you get pulled over during a traffic stop and there’s a gun under the passenger seat. You’re facing a 922(g) charge. Without ACCA, your probably looking at 4-6 years based off the sentencing guidelines and typical variances. With ACCA? 15 years mandatory minimum. The prosecutor knows this, and there gonna use it to force you into a plea deal. They’ll offer you 10 years if you plead guilty, which sounds terrible, but its 5 years less then the mandatory minimum if you go to trial and lose—so alot of defendants take the plea even if they got a viable defense because the risk of losing at trial is to high when ACCA applies. This is exactly why ACCA is so controversial and why so many criminal justice reform advocates want it repealed or reformed, because it gives prosecutors enormous power and results in disproportionate sentences for people who maybe shouldn’t be in prison for 15+ years for simple gun possession.

If you got prior convictions and you’re facing a 922g charge, the FIRST thing you’re attorney needs to do is figure out whether ACCA applies. If it does, that changes the entire strategy for you’re case. You might need to fight harder at trial because the plea offer might not be much better then the trial exposure. Or you might need to focus on challenging whether you’re priors actually qualify as predicates—which requires a detailed categorical approach analysis that many attorneys don’t know how to do properly and which involves comparing the elements of you’re state conviction to the federal definition of violent felony or serious drug offense to see if theres a mismatch that could disqualify the prior from counting.

Another trap: multiple firearms don’t mean multiple convictions, but they do mean sentencing enhancements. If you possessed 5 guns, you can’t be convicted of 5 seperate counts because that would violate double jeopardy—the counts have to be merged. But the sentencing guidelines under U.S.S.G. Section 2K2.1(b)(1)(A) allow the judge to increase you’re offense level if the offense involved three or more firearms. So you might only have one conviction, but you’re sentence could be significantly higher based off the number of guns. This is something prosecutors don’t always explain clearly during plea negotiations, and defendants sometimes think “oh its just one count so its not that bad” without realizing the sentencing enhancement is gonna add years to there sentence anyway.

I been handling federal gun cases for many, many years and I’m telling you: ACCA is the biggest threat you face if you got prior convictions. If you’re attorney isn’t immediately analyzing whether ACCA applies and developing a strategy to challenge it or mitigate it, you need a different attorney. Seriously. This isn’t an area where you want someone whose just gonna go through the motions. The difference between 6 years and 15 years is you’re entire life.

Your Next 72 Hours: What To Do RIGHT NOW

Okay, so you’re facing federal gun charges or you think you might be under investigation. What do you actually do right now—like, today, this minute? Here’s you’re action plan for the next 72 hours, and I’m being real with you about what matters and what doesn’t.

First: STOP TALKING. Seriously. Don’t talk to nobody about this case. Not the police. Not federal agents. Not you’re friends. Not you’re family. Not on the phone. Not in text messages. Not on social media. Nothing. If federal agents show up at you’re door or call you, you say exactly this: “I’m invoking my right to remain silent and I want a lawyer.” That’s it. Don’t explain. Don’t try to talk you’re way out of it. Don’t think you can convince them your innocent. Everything you say will be used against you, and I mean everything—even stuff that seems harmless or exculpatory will be twisted by prosecutors to support there case against you.

I seen so many cases where defendants destroyed there own defense by talking to agents without a lawyer present. The agents seem friendly, they say they just want to “hear your side of the story,” they imply that cooperating will help you—its all a trap. There job is to build a case against you, not to help you. Even if you’re 100% innocent, talking without a lawyer is a massive mistake. You might think you’re explaining why you didn’t do anything wrong, but you’re actually giving them evidence they can use to prosecute you.

Second: Hire a federal criminal defense attorney immediately. Not tomorrow. Not next week. Today. Federal gun cases move fast, and evidence is being gathered right now. Every day you wait is another day the government is building its case against you. You need someone whose experienced with 922(g) cases specifically, whose handled ACCA issues, whose familiar with the current constitutional challenges post-Bruen and Range, and whose tried federal cases before. This isn’t the time to go with you’re cousin whose a real estate lawyer or the guy whose “really good at DUIs.” You need someone who knows federal criminal procedure and whose handled these exact charges before.

Look, I get it—lawyers are expensive. But here’s the thing: you’re looking at potentially 10-15 years in federal prison. This isn’t a traffic ticket. This is you’re life. If you can’t afford a private attorney, ask for a federal public defender—there actually really good in many districts and there experienced with these cases. But do NOT try to handle this yourself or wait to see what happens. Federal charges don’t just go away because you ignore them.

Third: Preserve evidence that helps you’re defense. If you got witnesses who can testify that the gun wasn’t yours, get there contact information to your attorney immediately. If you got receipts, text messages, or other documents that support you’re defense, save them and give them to your lawyer. If their are cameras that might of recorded the incident, tell your attorney right away so they can try to preserve that footage before its deleted. Time is critical—evidence disappears quickly.

Fourth: Understand who actually gets prosecuted federally. Not every felon in possession case goes federal. The feds prioritize certain cases based off Project Safe Neighborhoods priorities: (1) cases involving domestic violence, (2) defendants with multiple violent priors, (3) guns possessed during other federal investigations (like drug trafficking), and (4) cases in high-crime areas targeted by federal task forces. If you’re case doesn’t fit these priorities, their might be a possibility it stays at the state level or doesn’t get charged at all—but don’t count on that. If the feds have picked up you’re case, assume its serious and act accordingly.

Bottom line: the next 72 hours matter. Don’t waste them. Get a lawyer, stop talking, and start building you’re defense.

Can You Ever Get Your Gun Rights Back?

So lets say you’re convicted or you already have a prior felony conviction. Are you banned from owning guns forever? The answer—it depends, and their actually been some major developments in 2024-2025 that most people don’t know about.

First, the bad news: since 1992, ATF has been prohibited by Congress from using appropriated funds to investigate or process applications for relief under 18 USC 925(c), which is the statute that allows people to petition to have there firearm disabilities removed. For 30+ years, this avenue has been completely closed. Even if you could prove you was rehabilitated and posed no danger, you couldn’t even apply.

But here’s the breaking news: in March 2025, the Department of Justice published a proposed rule to revive the Section 925(c) process. Attorney General Pam Bondi stated: “For too long, countless Americans with criminal histories have been permanently disenfranchised from exercising the right to keep and bear arms.” The proposed rule would allow non-violent offenders to petition for restoration of gun rights through DOJ. Violent felons, registered sex offenders, and illegal aliens would remain presumptively ineligible “absent extraordinary circumstances,” but if you got a non-violent felony—especially something like fraud, theft, or drug possession from years ago—you might have a pathway to restoration once this rule is finalized.

This is huge. No competitor website has this information yet because its so recent. If you’re a non-violent felon whose been prohibited from possessing firearms, you need to watch for when this rule becomes final and be ready to apply immediately.

Second avenue: state-level rights restoration. Under 18 USC 921(a)(20), a conviction “does not include one that has been expunged, or set aside or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored…unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or recieve firearms.” If you’re state restores you’re civil rights—including the right to possess firearms—then the federal disability is automatically lifted. Many states have restoration processes, though they vary enormously in terms of eligibility and difficulty. If you’re conviction was in a state that allows restoration, this might be you’re best bet.

Third avenue: if you’re in the Third Circuit and you have a non-violent felony, you might be able to challenge 922(g) as unconstitutional as applied to you based off Range v. Attorney General. This doesn’t restore you’re rights prospectively, but it could be a defense if you’re charged with 922(g) and you can show you’re underlying felony doesn’t justify lifetime disarmament under the history-and-tradition test from Bruen.

Look, I’m not gonna sugarcoat it: getting gun rights back after a felony conviction is hard. But for the first time in 30+ years, their are actually pathways opening up for non-violent offenders. If this matters to you, talk to an attorney who understands federal firearms law and whose tracking these developments.

What Happens Next: You Need To Act NOW

Alright look. Your facing federal charges. 10 years. Maybe 15 if ACCA applies. You’re entire life on the line. The prosecutors building there case right now. Every day you wait they get stronger. Don’t wait. Don’t think about it. Don’t try to figure it out on you’re own.

Call us. (212) 300-5196. 24/7. Free consultation.

We handled hundreds of federal gun cases. We know these prosecutors. We know what works and what doesn’t. We know the constitutional challenges. We know how to fight ACCA. We know how to challenge constructive possession. We know when to negotiate and when to go to trial.

This is you’re life. You’re freedom. You’re family. Don’t trust it to someone whose gonna go through the motions and take the first plea offer. You need someone whose gonna fight. Who understands the stakes. Who knows federal criminal defense.

We’re here. Right now. Call (212) 300-5196.

Federal charges doesn’t wait. Neither should you.

Spodek Law Group – Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys – Available 24/7