The arrest described in this NY Post article presents an opportunity to highlight a subtle distinction in federal criminal law.
The story notes that this defendant faces state charges for “certain persons forbidden,” which is the unique way Alabama labels people prohibited from possessing firearms. (See AL Code § 13A-11-72.) That statute includes a wide range of categories, everything from convicted felons to “habitual drunkards.”
The story also notes that in addition to multiple firearms and copious amounts of ammunition, he was also found in possession of body armor, and that “multiple federal charges are likely.”
The article doesn’t say what specific federal charges are expected, and it doesn’t describe details of his criminal history. But the nature of his criminal history could affect what federal charges will apply.
I have written a bajillion times about felons being prohibited from possessing firearms. I have fewer opportunities to write about the prohibition on possessing body armor. But here’s an important distinction: While (almost) all felons are prohibited from possessing firearms, the federal prohibition on possessing body armor only applies to “violent felons.” See 18 U.S. Code § 931.
I wrote about th history of that law in this post after the Buffalo mass shooting in 2022: https://chittumlaw.com/felons-body-armor/. In that post, I pointed out the AP’s mistaken understanding of the law. (To the AP’s credit, they corrected the article afterward.)
My knowledge of this law isn’t theoretical. Once arrested a felon in possession of both firearms and body armor. The case ultimately made its way to the 6th Circuit. (You can read it here: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca6/07-6210/09a0426n-06-2011-02-25.html.)
In one of those weird quirks of the law, the defendant was a “violent felon” for purposes of possessing body armor but was not a felon for purposes of possessing the firearms. Go figure. (It was a function of Ohio law’s automatic restoration of rights for felony convictions, and because what counts as a prohibitor is determined by state law. See 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(20)(B).)
At any rate, Jeremy Wayne Shoemaker seems like a bad guy who probably shouldn’t have firearms or body armor. We’ll see what the law says.
You can read the story here: https://nypost.com/2025/10/29/us-news/alabama-man-jeremy-wayne-shoemaker-arrested-for-armed-threats-to-synagogues/.