United States v. Lowmaster
── United States v. Lowmaster ──
Case No.: 23-3219
Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Date: March 24, 2026
Category: General
Appellate Case: 23-3219 Document: 72-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 1
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT March 24, 2026
_________________________________
Christopher M. Wolpert
Clerk of Court
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. No. 23-3219
(D.C. No. 6:22-CR-10012-EFM-1)
RYAN CARL LOWMASTER, (D. Kan.)
Defendant - Appellant.
_________________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
_________________________________
Before MATHESON, MURPHY, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
Ryan Carl Lowmaster pled guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a
firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and was sentenced to 84 months in prison,
followed by three years of supervised release.
On appeal, he argues that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional under the Second
Amendment, both facially and as applied to him, stating that he raises this argument “for
*
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this
appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered
submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent,
except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may
be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and
10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Appellate Case: 23-3219 Document: 72-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 2
preservation purposes only, as it is currently foreclosed by Vincent v. Garland, 80 F.4th
1197 (10th Cir. 2023).” Aplt. Br. at 3. 1 Since Mr. Lowmaster filed his brief (he did not
file a reply brief), the Supreme Court vacated this decision and remanded for
reconsideration in light of United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024). Vincent v.
Garland, 602 U. S. --- (2024) (No. 23-683). On remand, this court readopted our
decision. Vincent v. Bondi, 127 F.4th 1263 (10th Cir. 2025). The Supreme Court denied
certiorari in Vincent v. Bondi on March 2, 2026. 607 U.S. --- (2026) (No. 24-1155).
Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm the district court’s
judgment.
Entered for the Court
Scott M. Matheson, Jr.
Circuit Judge
1
His brief states that “[b]ecause Mr. Lowmaster did not raise this claim below,
this Court’s review is for plain error.” Aplt. Br. at 3. Because Mr. Lowmaster does not
address the plain error requirements in his brief, we would “ordinarily deem the issue
waived,” United States v. Leffler, 942 F.3d 1192, 1196 (10th Cir. 2019), but he cannot
show plain error, let alone error, because, as his brief notes, “the issue raised in this case
is currently foreclosed by circuit precedent,” Aplt. Br. at 6.
2
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}