Navigating the 'legal requirement' to receive a recept for a seized firearm

[pex]

I often see the mention that we 'must' get a receipt for our firearms when they are seized, under apparently any situation. I don't know if that 'must' means there is a legal requirement that the police officer provide one, or that for the sake of getting police to hold such a standard, that we all ask for one.

Here's where I think this is going to go:

If your firearm is confiscated you MUST get a receipt for it.

Is there authority in statute that requires the police do this?

§6105(f)(4)

(4) The owner of any seized or confiscated firearms shall be provided with a signed and dated written receipt by the appropriate law enforcement agency. This receipt shall include, but not limited to, a detailed identifying description indicating the serial number and condition of the firearm. In addition, the appropriate law enforcement agency shall be liable to the lawful owner of said confiscated or seized firearm for any loss, damage or substantial decrease in value of said firearm that is a direct result of a lack of reasonable care by the appropriate law enforcement agency

I figured someone might quote that, and I'm unsure as to why. Here's the latest from Purdon's at West:

(4)(i) The owner of any seized or confiscated firearms or of any firearms ordered relinquished under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108 shall be provided with a signed and dated written receipt by the appropriate law enforcement agency. This receipt shall include, but not limited to, a detailed identifying description indicating the serial number and condition of the firearm. In addition, the appropriate law enforcement agency shall be liable to the lawful owner of said confiscated, seized or relinquished firearm for any loss, damage or substantial decrease in value of said firearm that is a direct result of a lack of reasonable care by the appropriate law enforcement agency.

This change occurred per Act 2005-66 legislation.

Emphasis mine.

But even without that, I'm not sure how anyone constructed this to mean seizure outside the purposes of a person whose firearms have been confiscated pursuant to being an offender of 6105(a)(1).

Here is 23PA.C.S.6108(a)(7)

(7) Ordering the defendant to temporarily relinquish to the sheriff the defendant's other weapons and ammunition which have been used or been threatened to be used in an incident of abuse against the plaintiff or the minor children and the defendant's firearms and prohibiting the defendant from acquiring or possessing any firearm for the duration of the order and requiring the defendant to relinquish to the sheriff any firearm license, issued under section 6108.3 (relating to relinquishment to third party for safekeeping) or 18 Pa.C.S. § 6106 (relating to firearms not to be carried without a license) or 6109 (relating to licenses) the defendant may possess. A copy of the court's order shall be transmitted to the chief or head of the police force or police department of the municipality and to the sheriff of the county of which the defendant is a resident. When relinquishment is ordered, the following shall apply:


(i)(A) The court's order shall require the defendant to relinquish such firearms, other weapons, ammunition and any firearm license pursuant to the provisions of this chapter within 24 hours of service of a temporary order or the entry of a final order or the close of the next business day as necessary by closure of the sheriffs' offices, except for cause shown at the hearing, in which case the court shall specify the time for relinquishment of any or all of the defendant's firearms.

(B) A defendant subject to a temporary order requiring the relinquishment of firearms, other weapons or ammunition shall, in lieu of relinquishing specific firearms, other weapons or ammunition which cannot reasonably be retrieved within the time for relinquishment in clause (A) due to their current location, provide the sheriff with an affidavit listing the firearms, other weapons or ammunition and their current location. If the defendant, within the time for relinquishment in clause (A), fails to provide the affidavit or fails to relinquish, pursuant to this chapter, any firearms, other weapons or ammunition ordered to be relinquished which are not specified in the affidavit, the sheriff shall, at a minimum, provide immediate notice to the court, the plaintiff and appropriate law enforcement authorities. The defendant shall not possess any firearms, other weapons or ammunition specifically listed in the affidavit provided to the sheriff pursuant to this clause for the duration of the temporary order.

(C) As used in this subparagraph, the term "cause" shall be limited to facts relating to the inability of the defendant to retrieve a specific firearm within 24 hours due to the current location of the firearm.

(ii) The court's order shall contain a list of any firearm, other weapon or ammunition ordered relinquished. Upon the entry of a final order, the defendant shall inform the court in what manner the defendant is going to relinquish any firearm, other weapon or ammunition ordered relinquished. Relinquishment may occur pursuant to section 6108.2 (relating to relinquishment for consignment sale, lawful transfer or safekeeping) or 6108.3 or to the sheriff pursuant to this paragraph. Where the sheriff is designated, the sheriff shall secure custody of the defendant's firearms, other weapons or ammunition and any firearm license listed in the court's order for the duration of the order or until otherwise directed by court order. In securing custody of the defendant's relinquished firearms, the sheriff shall comply with 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(f)(4) (relating to persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms). In securing custody of the defendant's other weapons and ammunition, the sheriff shall provide the defendant with a signed and dated written receipt which shall include a detailed description of the other weapon or ammunition and its condition.

(iii) The sheriff shall provide the plaintiff with the name of the person to which any firearm, other weapon or ammunition was relinquished.

(iv) Unless the defendant has complied with subparagraph (i)(B) or section 6108.2 or 6108.3, if the defendant fails to relinquish any firearm, other weapon, ammunition or firearm license within 24 hours or upon the close of the next business day due to closure of sheriffs' offices or within the time ordered by the court upon cause being shown at the hearing, the sheriff shall, at a minimum, provide immediate notice to the court, the plaintiff and appropriate law enforcement agencies.

(v) Any portion of any order or any petition or other paper which includes a list of any firearm, other weapon or ammunition ordered relinquished shall be kept in the files of the court as a permanent record thereof and withheld from public inspection except:

(A) upon an order of the court granted upon cause shown;

(B) as necessary, by law enforcement and court personnel; or

(C) after redaction of information listing any firearm, other weapon or ammunition.

(vi) As used in this paragraph, the term "defendant's firearms" shall, if the defendant is a licensed firearms dealer, only include firearms in the defendant's personal firearms collection pursuant to 27 CFR § 478.125a (relating to personal firearms collection).

(7.1) If the defendant is a licensed firearms dealer, ordering the defendant to follow such restrictions as the court may require concerning the conduct of his business, which may include ordering the defendant to relinquish any Federal or State license for the sale, manufacture or importation of firearms as well as firearms in the defendant's business inventory. In restricting the defendant pursuant to this paragraph, the court shall make a reasonable effort to preserve the financial assets of the defendant's business while fulfilling the goals of this chapter.

Do we have some sort of case law that extends 18PA.C.S.6105(f)(4) for all instances of seizure?

Let's work from here. Please provide any reasons,whose basis is in law, that the police must provide a receipt. Thanks!

[skyjerk]

I often see the mention that we 'must' get a receipt for our firearms when they are seized, under apparently any situation. I don't know if that 'must' means there is a legal requirement that the police officer provide one, or that for the sake of getting police to hold such a standard, that we all ask for one.

Here's where I think this is going to go:



Let's work from here. Please provide any reasons,whose basis is in law, that the police must provide a receipt. Thanks!

I think its more that we should get one, and that the LEO must provide one when asked, rather than a claim that there is a legal requirement
that we must get one if an LEO confiscates a firearm.

We are not required by law as far as I know.

This is for our own benefit that we get a receipt, that way we can prove that the police seized it.

Case in point, I believe there is a thread somewhere in here where a man was
arrested, and all his firearms confiscated (and destroyed) after his whacked out girlfriend phoned in a bogus report.

He has no proof of what was taken, and so has no recourse to recover any damages.

[normanvin]

I don't know that "they" must supply one. But I myself would not walk away with out a reciept. I paid good money for the Firearm. And I would like some proof that they confiscated it. Every time I take a firearm to a gunsmith to have work done they suppy me with a reciept.

[Pa. Patriot]

Lemme translate pex's question...

(4)(i) The owner of any seized or confiscated firearms or of any firearms ordered relinquished under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108 shall be provided with a signed and dated written receipt by the appropriate law enforcement agency.

Hmm... Shall be provided. Does that mean will/must be provided ...or... shall be available, such as if asked for one...

I say the former

[pex]

Looks like I misread (4)(i) when I responded with the updated statute. I concede after a rereading that it would apply to, under a specific context, 'firearms':

1) seized
2) confiscated
3) ordered relinquished under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108.

In short order I'll talk about context where I think this might be limited to, and the definition of 'firearms' for this section, which I believe is not the 6102 definition.

[pex]

For the purposes of 16PA.C.S.6105, firearm is defined:

(i) Firearm.--As used in this section only, the term "firearm" shall include any weapons which are designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive or the frame or receiver of any such weapon.

Rather than being it's own section of statute, 6105(f)(4)(i) is a subsection of 6105:

§ 6105. Persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms

which is made of of the following subsections:

(a) Offense defined.--
(a.1) Penalty.--
(b) Enumerated offenses.--
(c) Other persons.--
(d) Exemption.--
(e) Proceedings.--
(f) Other exemptions and proceedings.--
(g) Other restrictions.--
(h) License prohibition.--
(i) Firearm.--
(j) Copy of order to State Police.--

These sections in general have very much to do with persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms, and how they will be dealt decided and dealt with.

6105(f)(4)(i) appears to be in reference to proceedings regarding the disability of firearms ownership as it relates to 6105. I don't think the courts will ignore this relation.

I would love for 6105(f)(4)(i) to be available for use in all situations of seizure, for the purposes of accountability, repossession, etc. It may simply be that by due process we are entitled to such a receipt, rather than 6105(f)(4)(i). I am worried about the true nature of 6105(f)(4)(i), however, and anyone who believes it is all encompassing should review the whole of 6105. (Especially as we go on the radio claiming that is a legal requisite...)

Any case law which has tested 6105(f)(4)(i) or due process as it relates to receipting would be appreciated here.

[Damage control]

Here you go.

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


See where I'm going here?


DC

[pex]

I'm sorry, what? We're talking about the law that the executive and the judiciary believe in, not that babble.

If you, I, and Thomas Jefferson believe in that, but the guys-with-guns-ready-to-use-them don't... well, here we are.

Besides, there's no mention of receipts there, although I would certainly think security of my effects and due process would involve receipts, having been deprived of my property and liberty.

That's of course why I seek case law or other statute that might help us make a case for this.

Just in case the fourth doesn't apply to the states and the fourteenth was never legally ratified:

Security From Searches and Seizures
Section 8.
The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures, and no warrant to search any place or to seize any person or things shall issue without describing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation subscribed by the affiant.

[larrymeyer]

IANAL But if they size it and don't provide a receipt I'd get a lawyer to file I believe it's called a Retention of Evidents it would prevent them from destroying the gun

[Damage control]

I'm sorry, what? We're talking about the law that the executive and the judiciary believe in, not that babble.

If you, I, and Thomas Jefferson believe in that, but the guys-with-guns-ready-to-use-them don't... well, here we are.

Besides, there's no mention of receipts there, although I would certainly think security of my effects and due process would involve receipts, having been deprived of my property and liberty.

That's of course why I seek case law or other statute that might help us make a case for this.

Just in case the fourth doesn't apply to the states and the fourteenth was never legally ratified:

INAL My point is this, they should never take your property to begin with which makes receipts moot. And please don't ever refer to the Constitution as babble I take great offence to that statement. I have close family who have died for that "babble" so have some respect.

Back to my point for them to be able to take your property you are entitled to due process of law, if they have no PC to arrest you and take you in front of a judge they cannot take your property to begin with. If the judge orders you give over your property that is due process of law, and he must hand you a receipt.

DC