United States v. Tyree Belk

── United States v. Tyree Belk ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: June 01, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 23-4265 Doc: 51 Filed: 06/01/2026 Pg: 1 of 5 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-4265 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TYREE BELK, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:17-cr-00347-MOC-DCK-1) Submitted: April 30, 2026 Decided: June 1, 2026 Before WYNN and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: James W. Kilbourne, Jr., ALLEN STAHL & KILBOURNE, PLLC, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Dena J. King, United States Attorney, Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-4265 Doc: 51 Filed: 06/01/2026 Pg: 2 of 5 PER CURIAM: Tyree Belk was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery (Count 1), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a); Hobbs Act robbery (Count 2), in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1951; brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence (Count 3), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance analogue (Count 4), in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1); and possession of a firearm by a felon (Count 6), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court sentenced Belk to 135 months’ imprisonment. In a prior appeal, we vacated Belk’s conviction on Count 4 and remanded to the district court with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal on that count and to resentence Belk. United States v. Belk, No. 20- 4551, 2022 WL 17849372, at *1, *3-7 (4th Cir. Dec. 22, 2022). On remand, Belk moved to dismiss Counts 3 and 6 of the indictment, arguing that the statutes underlying those offenses facially violated the Second Amendment in light of N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). The district court denied the motion and resentenced Belk to 129 months’ imprisonment. Now, Belk again appeals, challenging the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss Counts 3 and 6. We affirm. * * The Government moves to dismiss this appeal, arguing that the mandate rule bars our consideration of Belk’s challenges to his indictment. As we have acknowledged previously, however, “[w]e need not answer some surprisingly intricate questions about whether [Belk’s] Second Amendment claim triggers the mandate rule,” as that rule is not jurisdictional. See United States v. Canada, 123 F4th 159, 161 n.* (4th Cir. 2024). We therefore assume without deciding that Belk’s Second Amendment challenges are properly before us and proceed to consider the merits of those challenges. See id. 2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-4265 Doc: 51 Filed: 06/01/2026 Pg: 3 of 5 We review de novo a district court’s ruling on the constitutionality of a statute. United States v. Jacobs, 166 F.4th 395, 398 (4th Cir. 2026). The Second Amendment protects “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms.” U.S. Const. amend. II. But, “[l]ike most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment