Mifflinburg PA: Man with gun at football game

[ImminentDanger]

Gunlawer is right... ARD has its advantages. Including, but not limited to, having your arrest record expunged should he finish the two year supervision without incident.

HOWEVER,

He was also correct in mentioning that the charge of Possession of a Weapon on School Property will show on his rap sheet until he gets it expunged some two years from now. The indictment is still active.

Here's the rub....
Under Federal law, "(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or
having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime
punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; http://www.atf.gov/publications/down...f-p-5300-4.pdf (on page 10)
Bold is mine. By keeping the indictment for a count of a crime that has a maximum jail penalty of 2.5 years active for the two years of supervision, he is effectively nullifying his RKBA for as long as the charge is pending.

Under Federal law, he cant use, own or possess firearms until he finishes his ARD.

Trial is a gamble, but its a sure thing that he cant carry for the next two years.

I thought "indictment" required a grand jury process? This guy was just arrested and charged by a LEO, though as I understand it, he's basically on probation for the term of ARD, which is also a (temporary) prohibitor if my understanding is correct.

In addition to whatever the final disposition of his criminal record..... YOU CAN BET YOUR LIFE, THAT THE SHERIFF HAS REVOKED HIS LTCF, AND IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO EVER ISSUE IT AGAIN.......


He was being defended by a Public Defender, several mistakes were made early in the case, and he refused the offered help from here ---

For resolution of this statute, this case is a WASH..... For the defendant, I suppose FEAR OF THE STATE was simply too much to bear... It's hard to blame him for protecting this physical freedom.... The M1 carries a potential of FIVE YEARS IN PRISON.... and you can never tell what our (anti)Justice System will try to impose on those who challenge it's desire/authority to regulate Constitutional Rights......

We need to concentrate on the Anfuso Case..... to see that the madness ends NOW....
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-ope...age-912-a.html

...
ID

[mikepro8]

Probation probably generally doesn't preclude ownership of firearms, just possession. Unless that is specifically in 922 or 6105 somewhere, otherwise it's just a court order which reverts to jail or prosecution for an original charge depending on the source of the probation order.

18 USC 921
(a) As used in this chapter—
(14) The term “indictment” includes an indictment or information in any court under which a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year may be prosecuted.
(20) The term “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” does not include—
(A) any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or
(B) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.
What constitutes a conviction of such a crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held. Any conviction which has been expunged, or set aside or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored shall not be considered a conviction for purposes of this chapter, unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.

An information has been filed against the defendant in this case. I don't see that it has been amended or withdrawn, unless there is operation by law in the ARD statutes.

As for the fact he can't acquire new guns per 922(d)(1), that's less worrisome than 922(n), which although I don't think would apply to interstate transport for interstate personal use of a firearm, the way they twist 922 and allow any statute with the word 'interstate' in it to be abused scares me. One easy misread by an officer or prosecutor and a person could once again face an unlawful prosecution (the first was this 912 arrest).

And I absolutely dispute that the police made a good faith charge of a 912 violation, given that they took an oath to the constitution and it's really only a small number of steps to show that the prosecution is impossible. (912 prohibition on 'possession' of 'weapon' (arm) > art 1 sec 21 > ginsberg dissent in muscarello cited by heller regarding 'bear' meaning to 'wear', 'carry', etc > Wright (1875) per curiam without authority citation versus today's Pa.R.A.P. 63.3(B)(5) > every PA right to bear arms case in PA cites to Wright or another case that cites Wright > now matter of first impression, versus bliss v commonwealth > art 1 sec 25 > void. -- that's for people who think just plain wording isn't enough.)

All very true, good post. I was always under the impression that a Bill of Information = indictment, but you spelled it out well.
You also pointed out that ARD does not necessarily preclude ownership of firearms, just possession. In my county, only possession of pistols are precluded as a condition of ARD. Don't ask why, it was like that long before I got there. You can own them, you just cant possess them while under ARD supervision.

As for the information being amended or withdrawn - I have never seen it amended or withdrawn as a condition of ARD. It stays in place in case the person does not finish the program and the DA can literally pick up where things left off prior to the ARD placement.

[GunLawyer001]

. . .

Under Federal law, he cant use, own or possess firearms until he finishes his ARD.

Trial is a gamble, but its a sure thing that he cant carry for the next two years.

Without getting too specific (because I don't have the time to look up the statutes), there's a difference between not being able to possess a gun, and not being able to buy a gun, and not being able to carry a gun.

From memory, while charges are pending I believe that you can't pass PICS or get an LTCF, but you're not yet a prohibited person with respect to owning a gun in your home.
Someone can correct me while I make copies of my tax forms....

[ImminentDanger]

Edit as of 6-8-2012

CPReport

(04/14/2010 Awaiting ARD Completion)
No further details -- It's been two years -- I wonder if he regrets not fighting it through??

- - - - - - - - - -

In looking over the charges assessed with his ARD participation (about $1600 worth of various fees)...... I noticed that he was assessed $5.00 for this:

Act 1994-158 - Creating the County Probation and Parole Officers’ Firearm Education and Training Commission

http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal...994-158/518173

Interesting.....

...