Nfa question for attorneys

[JG007]

I know it's "common knowledge" among most gun trust attorneys, and the 'big two' both claim it, but, I recently disagreed with an attorney that claimed in the commonly used hypothetical where the item is registered to the husband alone, either with no trust or generic trust, and the wife knows the combination to the safe, that they are both felons under constructive possession, and that people have been arrested and charged in this situation.

I believe it is not felony constructive possession, for both, and have never heard of nor could I find any instance of this actually happening

[jmoney]

I know it's "common knowledge" among most gun trust attorneys, and the 'big two' both claim it, but, I recently disagreed with an attorney that claimed in the commonly used hypothetical where the item is registered to the husband alone, either with no trust or generic trust, and the wife knows the combination to the safe, that they are both felons under constructive possession, and that people have been arrested and charged in this situation.

I believe it is not felony constructive possession, for both, and have never heard of nor could I find any instance of this actually happening

There are several cases of felons being arrested under the same theory for a firearm being present in the house. In fact if I remember right there is one in my criminal law textbook from law school. Google is bad source for the kind of information you are seeking, westlaw and lexisnexis are the proper place to be looking. Also, most of the time these things happen, it never goes to the appellate court, which means most are never going to be case law. Because this issue has been beaten to death in the courts since the 80s, it just doesn't pop up anymore.

In short, your attorney friends are right, you are wrong. I would be curious as to why they think both are breaking the law, as only one of them isn't allowed to be in possession of the restricted item(unless your local jurisdiction considers it aiding in some fashion), unless it is the federal law he is talking about.

Also, I should add. In some states, depending on your local prosecutor and local laws, I don't think it matters whether or not the wife knows the combination or has a key. It is generally presumed that husband and wife share these things and I think you would have a heck of a hard time trying to prove otherwise.

[Inkslinger]

I'm curious, how would anyone know if a situation like this existed? If said wife could access a NFA item, who besides her or her husband would know. Outside of committing a crime and having LEO going through your house, I would think this is a non-issue. It reminds me of the "constructive intent" argument when people buy an upper before they get their stamp back.

[jmoney]

Outside of committing a crime and having LEO going through your house, I would think this is a non-issue.

Bingo. It usually comes up during the investigation of another crime.

[Inkslinger]

Bingo. It usually comes up during the investigation of another crime.

OP, do you live a life of crime? Does your wife? My point is if you're being charged with constructive possession, you've probably got bigger fish to fry.

[JG007]

I know of the original 'constructive possession' case where the court said the drug dealer was justifiably charged with possession of the firearm with serial number removed, and the Florida case where the guy sold an illegal sbr to a cop, but removed the stock and vert grip while still selling them as one bundle, but that's it.

I'm going to need some evidence or I can only conclude that the wife knowing the safe combo is both false, and also the claim that couples have been charged is also false

It's doctrine for gun trust attorneys, but I can't find any basis


** hypo is that 'you' facilitated, assisted, etc her possession-crime

[jmoney]

I know of the original 'constructive possession' case where the court said the drug dealer was justifiably charged with possession of the firearm with serial number removed, and the Florida case where the guy sold an illegal sbr to a cop, but removed the stock and vert grip while still selling them as one bundle, but that's it.

I'm going to need some evidence or I can only conclude that the wife knowing the safe combo is both false, and also the claim that couples have been charged is also false

It's doctrine for gun trust attorneys, but I can't find any basis


** hypo is that 'you' facilitated, assisted, etc her possession-crime

Do a westlaw search or have your attorney friend do it for you it. It is not false. The case I'm thinking about is an old one where a felon is home from prison and his wife stores her pistol inside a safe and doesn't tell her husband the combination. The court concluded the felon had constructive possession of the firearm and he went back to prison, plus an additional ten years.

I'm telling you, this stuff does happen. I'm not sure what kind of proof you are wanting...you can always test it out for yourself and report back .


I'm not sure if the assistance would be an issue under texas law(I've never seen one where it was an issue), and I don't practice federal. If the arrest occurred in Texas though under state law, the wife would lack the statutory defense provided under texas law to possession of a suppressor though, whether she knew the combination or not. In federal court If there is a crime in regards to the facilitation of possession then I would absolutely assume the AG would file the charge against both parties.

Constructive Possession is a fact driven issue, and an expensive one as you will likely be arguing it in front of a jury.

[JG007]

Are you talking about the case I mentioned? Drug dealer staying with his girlfriend and her child, he says you can't change me for the gun with serial numbers removed, lower court says yes, and hypothetically all of you could be charged.

To get from there to your wife knowing the combination of the safe is......... Questionable

That's also part of the reason I think it may be unfounded, that's the whole foundation of their argument

I've mentioned it in the past, I'm a police officer and attorney, with some prosecution experience, so I have a basis for questioning their doctrine

[jmoney]

Are you talking about the case I mentioned? Drug dealer staying with his girlfriend and her child, he says you can't change me for the gun with serial numbers removed, lower court says yes, and hypothetically all of you could be charged.

To get from there to your wife knowing the combination of the safe is......... Questionable

That's also part of the reason I think it may be unfounded, that's the whole foundation of their argument

I've mentioned it in the past, I'm a police officer and attorney, with some prosecution experience, so I have a basis for questioning their doctrine

I don't think I've read the one involving serial numbers, the one I'm talking about is different and from minnesota I think (its been several years since I've read it). You are right to question the doctrine, as a lot of people don't like it and I know it can vary from state to state. The point of constructive possession is dominion and control. I think in some jurisdictions intent also comes into play. Frankly, just from taking a quick search it appears that even if the wife DOES NOT know the combination, the mere presence of the contraband, even in a locked safe, can give rise to constructive possession as there is a presumption the wife and husband would share that.

[Renegade]

an attorney that claimed in the commonly used hypothetical where the item is registered to the husband alone, either with no trust or generic trust, and the wife knows the combination to the safe, that they are both felons under constructive possession, and that people have been arrested and charged in this situation.

Complete nonsense borne from Internet idiots. Ask them to cite this safe combination case. How does a registered owner get charged with constructive possession (no such law), when he in fact owns the firearm, and it is registered to him...