Binding precedence and material facts

[sinebar]

What is the name of your state? Louisiana

Is it absolutely necessary for all the significant facts of a precedent case be present in a pending case? In the case US vs Dupaquier the 5th circuit reversed his 922 (g) (1) federal firearm conviction because Louisiana state constitution article 1 section 20 generally restored ALL his civil rights and his gun rights were restored by statute. But he had two other convictions in which the 5th circuit vacated and remanded for resentencing because it determined that he was not a convicted felon for the purpose of 922 (g) (1). The status of the other two convictions hinged on the 922 (g) (1) conviction. Now lets say another felon is charged under 922 (g) (1). The felon has a first offender pardon as provided by the Louisiana state constitution. The pardon document certifies in plain unambiguous language that petitioner has been fully pardoned and ALL rights of citizenchip and franchise are restored in Louisiana. His firearm rights also restored by Louisiana statute. Can such a felon use US vs Dupaquier as precedence in federal district court to have the 922 (g) (1) dismissed? BTW felons in louisiana are bared from serving on a jury notwithstanding a first offender pardon or Article 1 section 20. However the 5th circuit had to give effect to the plain language of Article 1 section 20. The restoration of the first offender pardon is of course generalized also and the language is plain. I know that the restoration of civil rights and restoration of gun rights would be significantly similar in the two cases but i'm not sure if the other 2 convictions would be important here since they had no bearing on the 5th circuit reversal of the Dupaquiers 922 (g) (1) conviction. Here the link to US vs Dupaquier if someone wants to read it.
[url]http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/us_v_dupaquier.txt[/url]

[jdmba]

I haven't read the case you're talking about, so my comment is merely directly towards the question: "Is it absolutely necessary for all the significant facts of a precedent case be present in a pending case?"

If I understand the question correctly, the answer is "no."

Often, several legal arguments are presented at once in an attempt to achieve the same outcome. Courts usually answer each argument separately.

You may cite such a case for the purpose of using just one of the arguments if the facts in your case do not make the other arguments/rulings relevant.

[tranquility]

That's what practicing law is all about. One side says this case is controlling because there was a man involved and the other says that case is completely different because the man had blonde hair in that case.

Make your argument and let the judge decide.