Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Felon owns house and

Discussion in 'Legal' started by jeep-2, Jan 7, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jeep-2

    jeep-2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    Messages:
    214
    his son is moving back with parents.
    Can the young man bring his hunting guns into the felons house without breaking any laws? I think he said the felony was 45 yrs ago and non violent.

    I said he could but suggested they ask an attorney that knows these things as i've never heard of this coming up before.
     
  2. George S.

    George S. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    Western WA
    The best thing to do is to check the state law regarding the issue. The state Attorney General's office would be a good place to start. Local LEO's may (and usually do) give wrong informaion about this. At least contacting the AG will be free, an attorney may charge for his advice.

    It may be that as long as the guns are locked up and the felon has no access to them, it would be OK. State law varies on this deal so make sure what's legal before he takes the guns back home with him.
     
  3. Pilgrim

    Pilgrim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,957
    Location:
    Nevada, escaped from the PDRK via Idaho.
    It seems to me after 45 years of clean living the felon would be a candidate to petition the governor for a pardon.

    Pilgrim
     
  4. armoredman

    armoredman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    16,765
    Location:
    proud to be in AZ
    Only BATFE can restore 2A rights, and Congress defunded them from doing so.
     
  5. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
    It is a shame that you have to spend thousands to try to purchase back rights that you should allready have.
    Even after spendig the money there is no garantee that your rights will be returned.
     
  6. Fn-P9

    Fn-P9 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    164
    Location:
    Washington State
    Maybe all would be criminals who thought ahead about breaking a law would think not only about jail sentences but that they might loose some rights, they would think twice about breaking the law. Yes after 45 years of clean living he should have his felony ruduced/changed/pardoned whatever. Plus sometmes it is too easy to get a felony nowa days. I suppose all this isnt anything new someone else hasnt said just my .02 thanks
     
  7. Shipwreck

    Shipwreck Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,633
    Location:
    Texas
    I have had this issue come up many times w/ probationers of mine. Generally, if the guns are locked up in a non common area of the home and the felon has no key/combination to the same, then it is okay.

    TECHNICALLY, the prosecutor could push it if they want. But in my area, this is acceptable with many of the Judges.

    This is not legal advice, however....
     
  8. whm1974

    whm1974 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,058
    That is not true. Governers can grant pardons for state crimes. In most states, provisions are there for felons convicted of those state crimes to regain thier rights after a certain period of time.

    Or depending on terms of probation, a person regains all of his rights after completeion.

    -Bill
     
  9. Spot77

    Spot77 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,221
    Location:
    MD
    Wasn't it G Gordon Liddy who said that his wife had a fine collection of firearms? :evil:
     
  10. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    That's simply not true.

    http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#a7

    and more importantly:

    http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#a8

     
  11. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    As stated before when this nonsense gets posted:

    Liddy is a blowhard idiot who says things his audience WANTS to hear, regardless of whether or not they have any attachment to reality/truth. His comments about firearms, his wife, and his access to them are a primary example of his nonsense.

    Federal law prohibits the POSSESSION of firearms and ammunition by persons convicted of crimes punishable by more than a year in prison. Possession, not ownernship, and that includes constructive possession.

    If Liddy claims about having access to his wife's gun are true despite being a prohibited person under federal law, then he has violated 18USC922(g)(1), because he constructively possesses those firearms.

    A little lesson in the reality of constructive possession:

    Black's Law definition of constructive is; "That which is established by the mind of the law in its act of construing facts, conduct, circumstances, or instruments. That which has not the character assigned to it in its own essential nature, but acquires such character in consequence of the way in which it is regarded by a rule or policy of law; hence, inferred, implied, or made out by legal interpretation; the word "legal" being sometimes used here in lieu of "constructive.""

    Which leads you to Black's Law definition of constructive possession; "A person has constructive possession of property if he has power to control and intent to control such an item." Com. v. Stephens, 231 Pa.Super.481, 331 A.2d 719, 723. "Being in a position to exercise control over a thing." US v. DiNovo, C.A.Ind., 523 F.2d 197, 201.

    If you would like a real world example of a felon in possession case where the defendant was found to be in constructive possession of a firearm, read the 7th Circuit decision in US v. Gill (1995). You can find it on findlaw.com

    The definition of constructive possession from an earlier 7th Circuit court decision (US v. Garrett, 1990) is; ". . . a person does not have actual possession but instead knowingly has the power and the intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over an object, either directly or through others."

    As I have said before on this forum:

    If this is more than mere idle curiosity, my advice is that you contact a competent attorney who is familiar with both federal and state firearms laws. If this is anything other than a hypothetical it's too important a question to be left to the internet pundits, including me.

    I'd hate to see someone get themselves in hot water because they got bad advice on the internet.
     
  12. Shipwreck

    Shipwreck Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,633
    Location:
    Texas
    See my above post.

    There was already a local trial where they tried to push the possession of a firearm by a felon when the guy lived in a home, and someone else had a gun in their dresser drawer. Guy was found not guilty for the reason I mentioned above.

    Like I said - its not a sure deal. And, U are never gonna get a letter from a prosecutor stating that. But, this seems to be the courtroom practice.
     
  13. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    also

    in va the state supreme court ruled in the favor of a felon who avaled himself of his dads shotgun(dad lived next door) to defend himself against folks shooting up his house.
    he threw the gun away when he heard cops coming they found it he was originally convicted
     
  14. erikm

    erikm Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    215
    Location:
    The Netherlands (unfortunately)
    An odd question about this case.

    What was the law at the time the father committed the felony? Was he barred from firearms ownership at the time. 45 years ago takes it pre-1968. That just might make things ex-post-facto or grandfathered in his case.

    Cheers,
    ErikM :evil:
     
  15. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Interesting theory, however it has no basis in legal reality. Even if the conviction was prior to 1968, if the person hasn't been pardoned, or had their rights restored and/or conviction removed from their record by some other mechanism, the person is still a prohibited person under federal law. See my post on the "Ex Post Facto/Lautenberg" thread for why.

    As I said before on this thread:

    If this is more than mere idle curiosity, my advice is that you contact a competent attorney who is familiar with both federal and state firearms laws. If this is anything other than a hypothetical it's too important a question to be left to the internet pundits, including me.

    I'd hate to see someone get themselves in hot water because they got bad advice on the internet.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page