United States v. Riddle

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 30, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-30899
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v
GARY K RIDDLE
Defendant - Appellant
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 02-CR-20028-ALL
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gary K. Riddle (Riddle) pleaded guilty to production of
child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and
possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 2252A(a)(5)(B). He appeals, arguing that these statutes are
unconstitutional as applied to his conduct because they exceed
Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce under the
Commerce Clause. In addition, Riddle states that his

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-30899
-2-
constitutional challenge is foreclosed by our ruling in United
States v. Kallestad, 236 F.3d 225, 231 (5th Cir. 2000), and only
raises the issue to preserve it for future review.
A valid unconditional guilty plea waives all non-
jurisdictional defects in the trial court proceedings against
a defendant, including an as-applied constitutional challenge
to a statute. United States v. Johnson, 194 F.3d 657, 659
(5th Cir. 1999), vacated on other grounds and remanded, 530 U.S.
1201 (2000), opinion reinstated with modification, 246 F.3d 749
(5th Cir. 2001). Riddle’s challenge to the interstate commerce
aspect of the statutes at issue does not raise a jurisdictional
issue. See id. (finding that interstate commerce requirement of
arson statute, 18 U.S.C. § 844(i), was “not a prerequisite to
subject matter jurisdiction.”); United States v. Robinson,
119 F.3d 1205, 1212 n.4 (5th Cir. 1997) (finding that interstate
commerce element of Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, was not
jurisdictional). Accordingly, by entering into an unconditional
guilty plea agreement, Riddle has waived his as-applied
constitutional challenge to 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and
2252A(a)(5)(B). See Johnson, 194 F.3d at 659.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --