The Texas Court of Appeals has affirmed the conviction of Milton Rederick Miller for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. The court ruled on June 11, 2026, that Miller's arguments against his conviction did not hold up under scrutiny. This ruling is significant as it reinforces the state's laws restricting firearm possession by individuals with felony convictions.

Miller's case stemmed from an incident where he was found with a loaded handgun and a BB gun after entering a residence without permission. He was arrested and later convicted, receiving a sentence of 45 years in prison. The court's decision affects Miller and others in similar situations, clarifying the legal boundaries regarding firearm possession for felons.

Background

Milton Rederick Miller was convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon under Texas Penal Code Section 46.04. The case arose after Miller entered a home without permission and was later found with a handgun. At the time of his arrest, he was on parole for previous felony convictions, which included serious offenses. His legal troubles led to an indictment based on a 1987 conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle and two other felony convictions from 1987 and 1990.

The case reached the Texas Court of Appeals after Miller raised several constitutional challenges regarding his conviction. He argued that the law barring felons from possessing firearms was unconstitutional as applied to him, particularly because his prior felony was non-violent and occurred decades ago. He also contended that he was denied proper access to legal representation and discovery materials during his trial.

The Ruling

The Texas Court of Appeals, led by Justice Steve Smith, ruled against Miller's appeal on all counts. The court stated, "We find that section 46.04 is not unconstitutional as applied to Miller under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution or Article I, Section 23 of the Texas Constitution." This ruling confirmed that the prohibition against firearm possession for felons remains valid, regardless of the nature of their past crimes.

The court distinguished Miller's case from a previous ruling in Range v. Attorney General of the United States, noting that Miller's felony convictions were serious and included a sexual assault charge. The judges emphasized that the historical tradition of firearm regulation supports the disarmament of individuals with felony convictions, regardless of whether their past offenses were violent.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for individuals with felony convictions in Texas. It reinforces the state's authority to restrict firearm possession, even for those whose prior offenses were non-violent or occurred many years ago. The decision also aligns with previous rulings from other Texas courts that upheld similar restrictions.

Moreover, the court's opinion suggests that the legal landscape surrounding firearm possession rights for felons will likely remain stringent. This ruling may deter future challenges to the constitutionality of laws restricting firearm access for individuals with felony records, as the court has indicated a strong precedent for maintaining such regulations.

What's Next

Miller's case may not be the last word on this issue, as he could seek further appeals. However, the court's ruling provides a solid foundation for the enforcement of firearm possession laws against felons in Texas. There are currently no related cases pending that would directly challenge this ruling.