Federal Prohibited Possessor Laws Expanded

Federal law prohibits certain categories of individuals from purchasing or possessing firearms. Some of these categories (felons, fugitives from justice) might be familiar to you. Others (individuals convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders), may not be.

On Monday, June 27, the United States Supreme Court, in Voisine v. United States, 579 U.S. ___ (2016) expanded the reach of one of these categories of prohibited possessors. This expansion makes Arizonans convicted of misdemeanor assault, ARS § 13-1203(a)(1), a charge we see all the time here at the firm, prohibited possessors under federal law. It also subjects them to prosecution under the federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9). Convictions under this statute can result in a prison term of ten years. 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2). Got a gun? Been convicted? Watch out.

18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) prohibits any person convicted of a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” from possessing a firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9). “Misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” is defined to include any misdemeanor committed against a domestic relation that necessarily involves the “use…of physical force.” 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(33)(A). The question answered by Voisine was “whether misdemeanor assault convictions for reckless (as contrasted to knowing or intentional) conduct trigger the statutory firearms ban.” 579 U.S. __ (2016). That is, is a conviction under a State statute which makes it a misdemeanor to “intentionally, knowingly or recklessly cause physical injury to another person enough to trigger the federal firearms ban? The Voisine Court answered that question in the affirmative.

The Court dismissed the petitioners arguments, who claimed because their Maine assault charges “could have been based on reckless, rather than knowing or intentional, conduct,” they were not subject to § 922(g)(9)’s prohibition. Id. Justice Kagan, writing for the Court, made irrelevant the distinction between a knowing, intentional, or reckless assault, noting: “Congress defined [misdemeanor crime of domestic violence] to include crimes that necessarily involve the ‘use of physical force. §921(a)(33)(A). Reckless assaults, no less than the knowing or intentional ones…satisfy that definition.” Id.

The Voisine decision has major ramifications for Arizonans; the Arizona statute, A.R.S. § 13-1203(a)(1), is one, like the statute at issue in Voisine, which makes it a misdemeanor to “intentionally, knowingly or recklessly” cause any physical injury to another person. Moreover, previous to Voisine, the the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rule that a conviction for a reckless domestic assault does not trigger §922(g)(9)’s ban was controlling. No longer. Individuals convicted of this Arizona statute for an assault against a domestic relation, after Voisine, are now prohibited possessors.

Recommended Articles

sealed document
Sealing Records Under Arizona’s New Law

Criminal records of arrests, even where charges are dismissed, and almost all convictions, even for minor offenses, can and do follow a person for years.

Pima County Preliminary Hearings and Grand Jury Indictments Felony Criminal Procedure

A preliminary hearing is the ostensible first stop in the system of supposed checks and balances embedded in the concept of criminal prosecution and justice

man behind jail cell
You’ve Been Arrested for a Felony in Pima County: What Happens Next?

You or someone you care about was just arrested for a felony in Pima County. This article will give you an overview of what to expect

The Prosecutor Failed to Give Me Evidence: Three Things You Can Do

Three things you can do where the prosecutor has failed to timely disclose important evidence related to your case.

article feature image
Domestic Violence for Professionals – Part III – Asserting Victims’ Rights to Influence Outcome

Today we’ll talk about how victims may also influence the final outcomes of domestic violence criminal proceedings in Arizona, particularly in relation to a putative offer of “diversion.”

Michael Harwin

About Michael Harwin

Michael’s skill and experience have been recognized repeatedly. He holds an A-V 5/5 preeminent rating by Martindale Hubbell. He has been named one of the top lawyers in Arizona by Southwest Superlawyers, and one of the best lawyers in Tucson by Tucson Lifestyle Magazine. He also has been named one of the best lawyers in the United States by BestofUS.com , and given the highest rating possible by AVVO, 10/10 Superb. Amazon Books