Submitted November 10, 2014.
Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Ft. Smith.
For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Allison Waldrip Bragg, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR.
Allon Anderson, Defendant - Appellant, Pro se, Oklahoma City, OK.
For Allon Anderson, Defendant - Appellant: James B. Pierce, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, Fort Smith, AR; Angela Lorene Pitts, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, Fayetteville, AR.
Before BYE, SHEPHERD, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
BYE, Circuit Judge.
Allon Anderson was indicted with failing to register as a sex offender. Anderson filed a motion to dismiss the indictment arguing, in part, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) violates the Commerce Clause. After the district court denied Anderson's motion to dismiss, Anderson entered a conditional guilty plea and was sentenced to 30 months of imprisonment. Anderson appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss. We affirm.
Anderson was convicted of failing to register as a sex offender in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a)(2)(B), which punishes individuals who travel in interstate commerce and thereafter fail to register as a sex offender pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 16913. Anderson had previously been convicted of aggravated indecent solicitation of a child in Kansas in 2009 which required him to register as a sex offender under 42 U.S.C. § 16913. Anderson properly registered in Kansas in 2012. Thereafter for the purpose of working, Anderson relocated to Oklahoma, and later Arkansas, in 2012, which triggered a requirement to update his registration under § 16913(c). Anderson failed to ever register as a sex offender in Arkansas. After being indicted in federal court for his failure to register, Anderson filed a motion to dismiss the indictment arguing the registration requirements of SORNA violate the Commerce Clause and the nondelegation doctrine of the United States Constitution and the Eighth Circuit had erred in holding otherwise. The district court denied the motion, and Anderson thereafter entered a conditional plea of guilty. On appeal, Anderson renews his Commerce Clause arguments regarding the constitutionality of SORNA.
" We review a challenge to the constitutionality of a federal statute de novo." United States v. Betcher,534 F.3d 820, 823 (8th Cir. 2008). " [I]t is a cardinal rule in our circuit that one panel is bound by the decision of a prior panel." I ...