Articles Posted in Weapons

In federal firearms prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), the government must prove not only that the defendant possessed a firearm, but also that the defendant knew at the time of possession that he was prohibited from doing so due to a prior felony conviction. This knowledge requirement was clarified by the United States Supreme Court in Rehaif v. United States in 2019. A recent decision from a federal court sitting in Florida illustrates how courts evaluate cases tried before Rehaif and whether a missing jury instruction on the knowledge element requires reversal. If you are facing a firearm charge under federal law, a knowledgeable Tampa criminal defense attorney can assess whether your constitutional rights were upheld during trial and sentencing.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the defendant was convicted in federal court of possessing a firearm as a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The charge stemmed from an incident in which law enforcement officers found a loaded pistol during a search of the defendant’s vehicle following a traffic stop. The defendant had previously been convicted of multiple felonies and was prohibited from possessing firearms.

Allegedly, the trial in this case occurred before the Supreme Court’s decision in Rehaif v. United States, which held that the government must prove the defendant knew of his felony status when he possessed the firearm. At trial, the court instructed the jury that to convict, it must find that the defendant knowingly possessed the firearm, but the instruction did not include the requirement that the defendant knew he was a convicted felon. Continue Reading ›

In Florida criminal matters, a conviction must be based on legally sufficient evidence proving every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If the prosecution fails to meet this burden, a defendant can challenge their conviction on appeal, as illustrated in a recent Florida decision issued in a weapons crime case where the defendant successfully argued that the State failed to present adequate evidence of an essential element of the charged crime. If you are facing gun crime charges or wish to appeal a conviction, it is smart to confer with a skilled Tampa gun crime defense attorney promptly.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of Florida law. Reportedly, during trial, defense counsel stipulated that the defendant was a convicted felon, but the trial court did not conduct a formal colloquy to confirm the defendant’s knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to require the State to prove that status beyond a reasonable doubt. It is reported that the State failed to introduce either a certified record of the defendant’s prior felony conviction or a formal stipulation into evidence.

It is alleged that following the trial, the jury returned a guilty verdict, and the defendant was sentenced to one year of reporting probation. The defendant subsequently appealed the conviction, arguing that the State’s failure to introduce sufficient evidence of his prior felony conviction constituted a fundamental error requiring reversal. Continue Reading ›

People convicted of felonies often lose certain rights, like the right to possess a weapon. As such, if they are subsequently found with a gun in their possession, they may be charged with a crime. Additionally, depending on their criminal history, they may be sentenced as a career criminal. In a recent Florida gun crime case, the court discussed the grounds for deeming a defendant a career criminal before ultimately determining the defendant was properly classified. If you are charged with a weapons offense, it is smart to meet with a Tampa gun crime defense attorney to determine your options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that in 2021, during a traffic stop, the defendant was found in possession of a firearm and ammunition. He subsequently pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of federal law. Prior to sentencing, the probation office drafted a presentence investigation report that included an enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) due to the defendant’s three prior convictions for crimes that were either violent felonies or serious drug offenses.

It is reported that these convictions included two for aggravated assault in 2003 and 2015 and one for delivery of cocaine in 2007. The defendant objected to the ACCA enhancement, arguing that his prior convictions for aggravated assault did not qualify as violent felonies and his prior drug crime conviction did not qualify as a serious drug offense. However, the district court overruled his objections, deemed each conviction as qualifying under the ACCA, and imposed a 180-month sentence. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

Criminal defendants will often want to mount a vigorous defense against the charges they face. In some instances, though, they will find it beneficial to enter into a plea agreement. Sentences issued pursuant to such agreements must abide by the sentencing laws and guidelines; otherwise, they may be overturned. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida weapons crime case in which the defendant argued that his consecutive sentences were illegal and ultimately prevailed. If you are accused of a gun crime, it is in your best interest to meet with a Tampa gun crime defense lawyer to determine your options for seeking a favorable outcome.

History of the Case

It is reported that pursuant to a plea agreement, the defendant was serving a twenty-year mandatory minimum prison sentence for aggravated assault with a firearm and discharge, as well as a consecutive five-year prison sentence, with a three-year mandatory minimum provision, for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The trial court imposed the sentences under section 775.087(2) of the Florida Statutes.

Allegedly, the defendant moved to correct his sentence, arguing that the consecutive sentencing structure was illegal because the crimes were committed during a single criminal episode with one victim and a single shot discharged that did not strike the victim. The trial court denied his motion, and he appealed. Continue Reading ›

In Florida, people generally have the right to carry firearms. There are exceptions to the rule, however. For example, people convicted of felonies can be charged with crimes for possessing weapons. Convictions for such offenses can carry significant penalties, and in many cases, it is unlikely that any subsequent changes in the law provide grounds for a reduced sentence, as explained in a recent Florida ruling. If you are charged with a weapons crime, it is smart to contact a Tampa gun crime defense lawyer to determine your possible defenses.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the defendant pleaded guilty to possession of multiple firearms as a convicted felon and received a sentence of 97 months in prison, based on his offense level and criminal history category. Subsequently, certain sentencing adjustments were issued by the United States Sentencing Commission, including Amendment 821, which the defendant sought to apply retroactively to his case.

It is reported that the defendant particularly focused on the part of Amendment 821, which allows for a downward departure in a defendant’s criminal history category if certain criteria are met, including prior convictions for possession of marijuana for personal use. Additionally, he argued that the executive order issued by President Joe Biden granting pardons for simple possession of marijuana offenses applied to his case. As such, he sought a revised sentencing of 87 months or lower based on these developments. Continue Reading ›

Pursuant to the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, people have a right to bear arms, which means that they are generally permitted to possess firearms. There are restrictions to the right, though; for example, people are prohibited from possessing guns in certain settings, typically deemed sensitive places. As held by a Florida court in a recent opinion, though, all government buildings do not necessarily constitute such places. If you are accused of possessing a gun in violation of the law, it is wise to meet with a Tampa gun crime defense lawyer regarding your rights.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the defendant, a U.S. Postal Service semi-truck driver in Tampa, was charged with carrying a concealed firearm onto federal property. The charges arose after the defendant, holding a Florida concealed carry permit, brought a Smith & Wesson 9mm firearm in a fanny pack for self-defense during work.

It is reported that in September 2022, agents from the U.S. Postal Service attempted to detain the defendant, leading to an arrest after an attempted escape. The defendant was charged with possessing a firearm in a federal facility and for forcibly resisting arrest. He moved to dismiss the charges against him, arguing that the law that criminalized possession of firearms in federal facilities was unconstitutional as applied to him and that he resisted an unlawful arrest. Continue Reading ›

In Florida criminal matters, the prosecution bears the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt. While the prosecution can use circumstantial and direct evidence to establish that a defendant committed a crime, it cannot rely on facts not in evidence, as explained by a Florida court in a recent case in which the defendant appealed his conviction for being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. If you are accused of a gun offense, it is smart to speak to a Tampa weapons crime defense attorney about your options for protecting your rights.

Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the State charged the defendant with being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. During the trial, the State presented testimony from a police officer that came in contact with the defendant during an investigation. The officer stated that the defendant told him he had a gun in his possession.

It is alleged that a second officer testified, corroborating the first officer’s report. The defendant testified and denied making the aforementioned statements or possessing a gun. During the State’s closing argument, the prosecutor told the jury the defendant was not reliable and implied that the second testifying officer was credible because he had not been convicted of a felony. Defense counsel objected, but the court overruled the objection. The jury convicted the defendant, and he appealed. Continue Reading ›