"Adjudicated" felons can own guns?

[NukemJim]

I'm a little confused. I thought once a felon no firearms without pardon or hearing by BATFE (not currentlly available due to politics :banghead However this article states otherwise

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080130/ap_on_re_us/jonesboro_shooter;_ylt=Asb3c0DtOa1.h_ZQ2p_wzpBH2ocA

Basicly one of the Joneboro school shooters is again a bad boy, no surprise. but this paragraph confuses me.

State courts sent Johnson and Golden to a juvenile prison until their 18th birthdays. Federal prosecutors then got them locked up until they turned 21. Johnson left prison with an "adjudicated" record — meaning he could own firearms

( Bold type added by NukemJim )

Does this mean that if someone commits a felony while a minor they can still own firearms?

Anyone understand what is going on?

NukemJim

 

[Kharn]

The criminal records of most minors are sealed upon reaching adulthood.

Kharn

 

[nalioth]

In some states, there are procedures to reinstate your rights after you've done your time. I believe this only applies to felons convicted of non-violent crimes.

These procedures are expensive and drawn out, from what I hear.

 

[ctdonath]

Coming of age cleans the slate in many jurisdictions.

 

[beachjumper]

I believe that some states make a distiction between a juvenile being adjudicated as a delinquent and an adult being adjudicated as a felon even if it's the same crime. If so, technically speaking Johnson would not be a convicted felon for the purposes of firearm possession laws. However, I sure if those crimes he committed 10 years ago were done today, he would have been tried as an adult and would still be in prison for those murders.

 

[Kim]

Since the ACLU types and others want to protect murdering minors this man was free with a clean record. Because of this law we now will put someone in the Federal pen for 10 years because they had a small amount of Marijuana and had 2 firearms. How does anyone feel about that? Lets see. Joe Blow goes to deer camp. He takes 2 joints cause he is camping and out in the wide blue wonder. He gets stopped. He is a felon from then on and he spends 10 years in the Fed Pen. Bad Law. Bad law. This is a law just so they can get someone that we have protected with other laws. Sad state of affairs.

 

[k_dawg]

Is not most of the federal regulations pertaining to the purchase of a firearm from a dealer?

Just like how an 18 year old can often own a handgun, he simply can't purchase it from a dealer.

 

[Zoogster]

Yes, and it is important many places as well. The SCOTUS ruled that juveniles are not required to be given the option of a jury.

In several states juvenile court does not even have the option of a jury, and a single judge decides "guilt" and determines the punishment. The burden of proof is quite low in juvenile court. A single individual decides thier guilt and thier fate. They cannot post bail, and do not enjoy most of the safeguards of an adult.

You or I could perform a citizen's arrest on a juvenile, and go into court as the sole witness and likely get a conviction. That is regardless of whether they are actualy guilty for what we arrest them for or not, the only person to convince is a single judge.

In CA juveniles 12-14 who commit the most serious of crimes like murder etc are tried as adults. Juveniles 15-18 are usualy tried as adults for most serious violent felonies. They are entitled all the rights of an adult when tried as an adult, and also become adult felons, getting the sentencing of an adult as well.

Those charged as minors for violent felonies, as well as other 707(b) offenses are wards of the court until the age of 25. They are prohibited in the state from owning a firearm until the age of 30 (assuming they get no adult prohibiting offenses or felonies.) Those for non 707 (b) offenses (some non violent felonies and/or misdemeanors) are wards of the court until the age of 21, and they are not prohibited at all afterwards.

The court never convicts them, or sentences them. They are never entitled to a jury of thier peers, and the sole finding of court is whether they are delinquent or not. They are also not entitled to bail.
So they are never convicted felons at any time, but adjudicated delinquents.

I would not advocate permanent prohibitions on anyone not entitled to trial by jury at the minimum. Even a military tribunal is determined by 3 people. Juvenile court is decided by a lone judge.

Juvenile court was created under the principle that young offenders were more suitable for rehabilitation. As such the juvenile system if focused more around rehabilitation than punishment. Because of that juveniles are not given many of the same rights and protections, nor many of the punishments.
With some places pushing to be tougher on juvenile offenders, many more are tried as adults than 10 or 20 years ago. That bypasses any safeties put in place for juvenile offenders.

 

[jaholder1971]

Juvenile courts are in all truthfulness a Kangaroo Court. Since they don't "convict" they don't have to determine guilt or innocence.

Good example: Junior is picked up by the cops for shoplifting cigarettes. The cops attempt to call you at home, but you're at work, so it takes a couple hours before you get to the police station.

Court date's set, you arrive with Junior. If the court appoints a lawyer, you might see him/her an hour before the court date. He'll present you plea options where Junior would pay a fine, court costs and work a a slave to the government for 200 hours called community service. This is done because he, the judge and the prosecutor came up with it the day before. You refuse, court in session.

Cop may never show up, the store manager is caught in lies and the store video tape could actually show the kid was never near the cigarettes. The judge, because you didn't lay down to their plea bargain, may very well adjudicate your kid a delinquent, fine him and place him in foster care because the cops couldn't find you, making you an unfit parent.

Can the judge so that? Yes, it happens every day.

 

[beachjumper]

You're absolutely right jaholder1971. I defended juveniles back in the '80's when I first became a Public Defender. Although we had more time to prepare a case than you indicate. The Judge in a juvenile trial is also the fact finder making him both the judge and jury. The burden of proof is the same as an adult trial, beyond a reasonalble doubt, but as you say, some judges ignore that. In my experience, I've had some judges that followed the law and some that found everyone guilty who dared to demand his right to a trial.

 

[mekender]

some states also have a system where you can be sentenced and still be adjuicated as "not guilty" usually those are people sentenced to "time served" but it can happen...

 

[GunTech]

Federal law mirrors state law. If you get your rights back under state law, you get them back under federal law.

 

[beachjumper]

What can happen in Florida mekender is that a judge can withhold adjudication on a felony charge and sentence the defendant to some county jail time or county time with probation. If the defendant is sentenced to DOC as part of his sentence then he must be adjudicated.
The person who gets a "withhold" and successfully completes his probation will not be considered a convicted felon for the purposes of gun or weapon possession as far as the state of Florida is concerned but the Feds may look at a withhold the same as an adjudication for many purposes. As far as having your rights restored, Florida will usually restore some rights of adjudcated felons such as the right to vote to those who meet the statutory requirements but rarely restore their rights to possess firearms or weapons.

 

[ilbob]

Lets see. Joe Blow goes to deer camp. He takes 2 joints cause he is camping and out in the wide blue wonder.

Lets see - Joe Blow knows it is illegal to possess weed. Joe Blow knows that mixing weed and guns is a big no-no. Joe Blow does it anyway. Is Joe Blow a complete innocent in the whole thing?

And how is smoking weed out in the wild any different than smoking it at home?

I am not trying to justify the drug laws. I think they are just plain counterproductive and most should just be done away with. But, as a fully grown adult, one needs to learn that some things are the way they are, and you need to learn to live with that.

 

[Kim]

I understand. But, I am saying this law is just so they can throw someone away for 10 years. The law is bad. But they would argue a case like this justifies it. It does not in my opinion. The real problem is because we let someone like this get away with no felony record(or out of prision at all) the rest of us put up with injustice. That is my opinion.

 

[Kim]

Plus alot of things are better outside.

 

[Cosmoline]

This is why many states now prosecute violent minors as adults. They go to adult prison and do adult time, with no clean slate at 21.

The newspaper seems to have some concepts mixed up. "Adjudicated felon" means you ARE A FELON. The issue in this case was apparently that the person had a sealed record and had a clean slate at 21 because he was a minor.

 

[rainbowbob]

I believe in the rights of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms of all kinds. And I believe that otherwise law-abiding citizens should be free to ingest whatever they want. However, I also believe there should be restrictions on criminals possessing firearms.

How is it possible this scum-bag punk could legally posses a firearm after killing five people and wounding ten? And does anyone believe it is reasonable that he should? The person that grew the pot he was smoking could do more time than he did - and forever lose his right to possess a firearm in the bargain. But this murderer is free to legally have a gun.

What is wrong with this picture?

 

[H23gsr]

I'm an "adjudicated felon" so to speak. I got charged with a felony and since it was my first time to get in trouble I got a defferred sentence. I will never actually be convicted of a felony though. Therefore I can still own firearms, vote, etc. And before you all start with holier than thou comments; What I did wasn't a violent offense, it wasn't even that bad. I didn't hurt anyone or anything. Just what I did happened to be a felony. I am all for giving NON VIOLENT felons a process to reclaim their rights. If you rob or murder someone than you should never be allowed to touch a gun again. The point of this is everybody screws up from time to time. Even GOOD people. Not everybody as much as some but that don't make them a bad person. I screwed up, manned up and owned up to it. Just gonna chalk it up to a life lesson.

 

[Cosmoline]

H23gsr, make extra sure about that. Sometimes the DA's sell defendants a pack of lies to get agreement on a conviction. At least in this state, a suspended sentence does nothing to the conviction and does not restore rights. So you can be a convicted felon and do zero time in jail. Of course as a convicted felon you can't own firearms. This snags a LOT of people later on when the feds nab them. It's a rotten system. Rotten right to the core. We have murderers and rapists getting charges knocked down for spinning some lies on the stand while good people who have done no harm to anyone get put up against the wall. And don't get me started on the "war on (some) drugs." Remember, cops and feds are just another form of predator. They move in for the kill when they smell blood. Don't chum the waters. Watch your back and double check your record. If you have questions take the time and money to consult with counsel.

 

[rainbowbob]

H23gsr -

I agree with you...non-violent felons should have a chance to retain or regain their rights. Violent felons should get no more chances - ever.

 

[Guitargod1985]

non-violent felons should have a chance to retain or regain their rights. Violent felons should get no more chances - ever.

That's right.

 

[honkylips]

Here in Colorado, juveniles can not be 'convicted' of a crime, unless they are charged as an adult. Juveniles are 'adjudicated a delinquent child', rather than being convicted of a crime. I don't know if the intent was to simply make things sound nicer since it's juvenile court, or if the intent was also to help a juvenile avoid the label of 'convicted felon' at such a young age. Either way, a juvenile whoe has been 'adjudicated a delinquent child for a crime that would have been a felony had he/she committed it as an adult', is not a convicted felon.

Juvenile records here are not automatically sealed either. The juvenile has to wait 4 years after his case has been closed (i.e. probation terminated) and they then have to petition the court to have their record expunged.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

How is it possible this scum-bag punk could legally posses a firearm after killing five people and wounding ten?

How is it possible that he is not still in prison?

Access to a car, a lighter, a gas pump, a bag of marbles on a tall building, and a lot of other things in the free world are a heck of a lot more dangerous to the rest of us than his access to a firearm.

If he is dangersous, he is dangerous. And he should be in prison. Unless in self-defense, if he killed people, he should be in prison for his entire life.

 

[ilbob]

non-violent felons should have a chance to retain or regain their rights.

In some respects it depends on your definition of "non-violent", but generally I agree.