USA v. Burns

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 01-1917
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Northern District of Iowa.
Scott John Borchers, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: August 1, 2001
Filed: September 27, 2001
___________
Before HANSEN, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
In this direct criminal appeal, Scott Borchers challenges the constitutionality of
18 U.S.C. § 228(a)(3), the Child Support Recovery Act (CSRA). Borchers pleaded
guilty to one count of failure to pay child support in violation of § 228(a)(3), and was
sentenced to ten months imprisonment, one year of supervised release, and restitution.
We conclude that Borchers’s challenge is foreclosed by this court’s prior
decision upholding the constitutionality of § 228(a)(3). See United States v. Crawford,
115 F.3d 1397, 1400 (8th Cir.) (enactment of CSRA was constitutional exercise of
Congress’s commerce power, because payment of child support on behalf of out-of-

-- 1 of 2 --

1The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Northern District of Iowa.
-2-
state child is substantially related to interstate commerce), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 934
(1997); United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660 (8th Cir.) (one Eighth Circuit panel
may not overrule another panel’s decision), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 824 (1997).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.1
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-- 2 of 2 --