One trial court's view of due diligence under 18 Pa.C.S. 6115 regarding scienter

[MDJschool]

Com. v. Rodriguez, 15 Pa.D.&C.4th 155 (1992).

"From the facts stipulated to by the Commonwealth and the defendant, this court must conclude that the Commonwealth failed to present a prima facie case that the defendant delivered a firearm to a person under the age of 18 years or had reasonable cause to believe the person to whom he delivered the firearm had been convicted of a crime of violence or was a drug addict, an habitual drunkard or of unsound mind. Therefore, the motion of the defendant to quash the information must be granted.

We note the Commonwealth urges defendant's motion be denied because the evidence does establish that the defendant delivered the 9 mm firearm to Harold Carl Hess, who did not at that time have a license to carry a firearm. Since the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act
[Page 158]
does not impose a duty upon one who delivers a firearm to first determine that the recipient has a license, the contention cannot prevail. Indeed, section 6106 of the Act clearly discloses that there are circumstances when a license is not required to be possessed by one who carries a firearm."