USA v. Pate

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
vs. 	) 	Case No. 25-cr-03110-MDH
)
SHAWN LEON PATE, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
ORDER
Pursuant to the governing law and in accordance with Local Rule 72.1 of the United States
District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment
was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for preliminary review. The Magistrate Judge
has submitted a Report and Recommendation to this Court. (Doc. 37) and Defendant has filed his
objections. (Doc. 40). The matter is now ripe for review.
Defendant moves to dismiss the indictment charging him with unlawful possession of a
firearm by a drug user, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3). Defendant moves to dismiss raising
an as-applied challenge to § 922(g)(3). Defendant requests an evidentiary hearing and that the
Court require the government to present evidence establishing, before trial, that Defendant is
subject to prosecution under § 922(g)(3). The government now contends that the constitutional
question should be deferred until after a trial on the merits.1 As set forth in the R&R, numerous
district courts within the Eighth Circuit have proceeded in this manner.
1 As noted in the R&R the government initially consented to an evidentiary hearing but has since
reversed its position and now contends the constitutional question should be deferred until after a
trial on the merits.
Case 6:25-cr-03110-MDH Document 45 Filed 01/20/26 Page 1 of 2

2
The background facts are set forth in the parties’ briefs and in the Report &
Recommendation, as well as the applicable case law. After a careful and independent review of
the record before the Court, the Court adopts the findings and recommendations of the United
States Magistrate Judge.
It is THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and incorporated herein. (Doc. 37).
It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (Doc.
No. 24) is DEFERRED for ruling until after trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: January 20, 2026
/s/ Douglas Harpool_____________
DOUGLAS HARPOOL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 6:25-cr-03110-MDH Document 45 Filed 01/20/26 Page 2 of 2