Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
United States of America v. Von Allen Randall
Date: 02-12-2026
Case Number: 22-CR-238
Judge: David C Godbey
Court: United States District Court for the Norhtern District of Texas (Dallas County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Dallas
Defendant's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory
Description:
Dallas, Texas, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with possession
of a firearm after a felony conviction, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
He argues that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment on its face.Randall also asserts that his prior Texas convictions for burglary are not
violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).
No. 25-10841
2
Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance or, in
the alternative, for an extension of time to file an appellate brief.
First, we have held that § 922(g)(1) does not violate the Second
Amendment on its face. See United States v. Diaz, 116 F.4th 458, 471-72 (5th
Cir. 2024), cert. denied, 145 S. Ct. 2822 (2025). Second, in United States v.
Herrold, 941 F.3d 173, 182 (5th Cir. 2019) (en banc), we held that Texas
burglary is generic burglary and constitutes a violent felony under the
ACCA. Accordingly, summary affirmance is proper. See Groendyke Transp.,
Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
of a firearm after a felony conviction, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
He argues that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment on its face.Randall also asserts that his prior Texas convictions for burglary are not
violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).
No. 25-10841
2
Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance or, in
the alternative, for an extension of time to file an appellate brief.
First, we have held that § 922(g)(1) does not violate the Second
Amendment on its face. See United States v. Diaz, 116 F.4th 458, 471-72 (5th
Cir. 2024), cert. denied, 145 S. Ct. 2822 (2025). Second, in United States v.
Herrold, 941 F.3d 173, 182 (5th Cir. 2019) (en banc), we held that Texas
burglary is generic burglary and constitutes a violent felony under the
ACCA. Accordingly, summary affirmance is proper. See Groendyke Transp.,
Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of United States of America v. Von Allen Randall?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard United States of America v. Von Allen Randall?
This case was heard in United States District Court for the Norhtern District of Texas (Dallas County), TX. The presiding judge was David C Godbey.
Who were the attorneys in United States of America v. Von Allen Randall?
Plaintiff's attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Dallas. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory.
When was United States of America v. Von Allen Randall decided?
This case was decided on February 12, 2026.