restriction to possess firearms

[ICEMAN]

In my experience, someone from Washington can get a domestic violence assault (gross misdemeanor) conviction vacated from their record, but this does not restore their firearms rights. The vacate only removes the conviction from the view of the public when they pull a criminal history on them. Law enforcement etc...can still see the DV firearms restricting conviction....

There are three things we are talking about here, Vacate of a record (hide from public view), Expungement  of a record (like it never happened), and Restoration of gun rights.

I understand that. But you said there is no means of restoring someones rights if they are convicted of a DV crime. But I'm sure there is. But you have to petition the courts for it. I believe it has to be a certain # of years before you can do it.

I think what you mean to say is that your rights arent automatically restored by having the conviction expunged. And I'm sure that is correct.

Another thing I have heard is that is extremely hard to get your record expunged in Wa. anymore. Dont know if thats true or not.

Well, I did say "gross misdemeanor? domestic violence conviction...and that is the rub. No state rcw which addresses firearm restoration when the conviction is a GM DV conviction...

[stevemiller]

The problem with this type of discussion is that the states and the fed do not apply a universal standard for restricting and/or restoring firearm possession rights. 

In this state, there is no provision for restoring someones rights if they were convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

wrong sorry.if you have the conviction vacated and then petition to have gun rights restored your good and have not been convicted.

[ICEMAN]

The problem with this type of discussion is that the states and the fed do not apply a universal standard for restricting and/or restoring firearm possession rights. 

In this state, there is no provision for restoring someones rights if they were convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

wrong sorry.if you have the conviction vacated and then petition to have gun rights restored your good and have not been convicted.

So not true.

Go try to get a job as a cop then.... 

When you vacate a record, it is still on your record, just not viewable to the public. It is still part of your record.

Not Destroyed.

You were convicted.

You still were convicted.

Don't trust me, fine. Go see here:  http://www.courts.wa.gov/newsinfo/index.cfm?fa=newsinfo.displayContent&theFile=content/guideToCrimHistoryRecords



Effect of Vacating Conviction. An offender whose conviction has been vacated may state for all purposes that he or she has not been convicted of that crime. When a conviction is vacated, however, the court file is not destroyed. The conviction may be used in a later criminal prosecution.

[stevemiller]

now you are switching it up,you said there was no way to get your firearm rights back in this state (wrong). now i agree with you on the cop ban and military ban you are correct but for diff, reasons no cops because its a conflict of interest say someone calls for assistance with dv and a convicted dv cop shows up might not be very helpful to the victim.I have helped people for years to get they re firearm rights restored in this state,and i do it for free and they only pay the courts less than 300.if they have no other convictions a clean driving record.You can only vacate once in lifetime,one conviction unless the convictions are related in time.(no i am not an att. but i have been studying for 3 years now just to do this pro bono work) PS> a cop can get his or her rights restored as well just cant be a cop

[GrainfedMuley]

A good buddy of ours was found with a few firearms and now is facing charges. He says he was not aware of the restriction since he thought he had his rights restored through the courts.

Any suggestions, ideas, comments or good Attorneys that will fight cases like this?

\



It depends on how long ago the said crime was committed.  I think the date is somewhere around 1994. If your said crime was committed after that date, then you have to go through the proses of expungement. Depending on the crime, not all crimes can be expunged. It depends on the violence of the crime.  If you did said crime before 1994 and have received a letter from the convicting court saying that ALL your civil rights are hereby restored, you good to go. That means you can now have a passport and leave the country, you can vote and even serve on a jury.
  That is Washington state's rules for restoring your gun rights. On a federal level The ATF definition of convicted felon means that you had to be incarcerated for more than 365 consecutive days. If you did less than 365, you are not by federal definition a convicted felon.

[HntnFsh]

Dont think he was convicted of a felony. It was DV. Still lose your right to posess firearms. But not a felony.

[Mudman]

Interesting stuff guys.  Confusing too. 

[Mike450r]

This guy could be and likely will be charged with a class b felony for unlawful possession of a firearm, maybe multiple counts if they charge for each firearm.  That is possible prison time.  The discussion regarding getting rights restored is not appropriate unless he was to have done it awhile ago.

It is too late now,  he needs to worry about keeping his butt out of prison, if he were to petition the court at this point it would be a "NO" for sure.  And if convicted of this new felony well,  no chance until he waits the 5 years and doesn't get in any more trouble.

[stevemiller]

 

[HntnFsh]

This guy could be and likely will be charged with a class b felony for unlawful possession of a firearm, maybe multiple counts if they charge for each firearm.  That is possible prison time.  The discussion regarding getting rights restored is not appropriate unless he was to have done it awhile ago.

It is too late now,  he needs to worry about keeping his butt out of prison, if he were to petition the court at this point it would be a "NO" for sure.  And if convicted of this new felony well,  no chance until he waits the 5 years and doesn't get in any more trouble.

Thats a very true point. We just kinda skipped right over that aspect didnt we!

[stevemiller]

The 5 year wait is a mute point.if he is convicted of this and he prob. will (sorry) he will have no chance.It can only be done for one crime ever unless it happened at the same time,so this felony firearm violation is the end for his gun rights.(but never say never i guess)All of this info and paperwork can be obtained at your prosecuting att. office.

[Mike450r]

The 5 year wait is a mute point.if he is convicted of this and he prob. will (sorry) he will have no chance.It can only be done for one crime ever unless it happened at the same time,so this felony firearm violation is the end for his gun rights.(but never say never i guess)All of this info and paperwork can be obtained at your prosecuting att. office.

The "I didn't know" defense won't work.  If you have the guns you are guilty.  I think the best outcome may be a plea deal for a misdemeanor if at all possible.

[stevemiller]

Yep that would do it,then there is a chance at getting them back after the wait period.(A CHANCE)

[GrainfedMuley]

The 5 year wait is a mute point.if he is convicted of this and he prob. will (sorry) he will have no chance.It can only be done for one crime ever unless it happened at the same time,so this felony firearm violation is the end for his gun rights.(but never say never i guess)All of this info and paperwork can be obtained at your prosecuting att. office.

The "I didn't know" defense won't work.  If you have the guns you are guilty.  I think the best outcome may be a plea deal for a misdemeanor if at all possible.

Quite simply........ignorance is no defense in a court of law.

[Alchase]

OK, a good friend of mine is going through something similar as we speak. He was arrested in 1979 at 16 years old and charged with a felony theft. He was with a group of teens that stole stuff out of the back of a K-mart store. The Prosecutor new he was a "tag a-long" his words,  that night, and they convicted him of felony theft, deferred for one year. He has been clean ever since. He has had CPLs multiple times in the years since, the last was in 2000, when he did not renew. Two years ago he reapplied for a CPL in King County and was denied. He was denied because of the "Felony Conviction" even though he was a minor, had it deferred, and has had CPLs in King County since.
Two years later he is almost through the restoration of his "right to carry" for lack of a better term. It has cost him $1800.00 in lawyer fees.

What he was told, since 911, background checks for CPLs also include "any" conviction, and the approvals of CPLs are held to much higher standard the pre-911. There was some Homeland Security/Sheriff co-operation reference as well.