FirstAlerts

Dubuque Man Convicted of Federal Firearm Offense

Austin Andrew Goodman faces up to 15 years in prison following his conviction in federal court for illegally possessing a firearm.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 10:20 a.m. ET
In an announcement released on , the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Iowa reported that Austin Andrew Goodman, 42, of Dubuque, Iowa, was by a federal jury on August 11, 2026, following a one-day trial in Cedar Rapids. According to the official record, Goodman was of possessing a firearm while prohibited after having previously been committed to a mental institution. Evidence presented at trial established that on March 3, 3025, Goodman entered a municipal building in Dubuque wearing a suit, an American flag over his shoulders, tape over his mouth, and a loaded firearm on his hip. He brought two leashed dogs and live-streamed his entry on Facebook while attempting to enter the city council chambers during an active meeting. Goodman faces a statutory maximum penalty of up to 15 years' imprisonment, a $250,000 fine, and three years of supervised release. United States District Court Chief Judge C.J. Williams will schedule sentencing following the completion of a presentence investigation report. Goodman remains in the custody of the United States Marshals Service. The prosecution, handled under case file number 25-cr-1039 by Assistant United States Attorney Emily K. Nydle, was investigated by the Dubuque Police Department, the Dubuque County Sheriff's Office, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation as part of Operation Take Back America.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 14:20current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble β€” all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.