Decision here.
This decision revolves around jury instructions, which isn't normally my thing. But it revolves around jury instructions of an affirmative defense for possession of a weapon by a previous offender. Essentially, this decision affirms that even convicted felons have the right under the Colorado constitution to possess firearms as long as they present some evidence that they are in possession of the firearm for the purpose of defending their home, person, and property.
This is based on a Colorado Supreme Court decision from 30 years ago. Since that time, the US Supreme Court has ruled that although the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms, that doesn't prevent the US from denying that right to convicted felons. In the decision at hand, the court of appeals declines "to speculate whether our supreme court would modify its holding in Ford in light of Heller."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I realize that this is a very unpopular "like" but I gotta say the Honorable Court can instruct a jury any way it likes, at that point my job's been done for a long time. It's surprising what a sensitive issue this is ;)
ReplyDeleteI'm good with this decision for a couple reasons: first, it was the right decision based on existing state supreme court precedent. Even if the decision is going to be reversed, it wasn't the court of appeals' place to do that.
DeleteSecond, not only is our job done by the time jury instructions are read, but this affirmative defense really doesn't inhibit our job in the first place. If a felon is somehow causing problems with a gun, or even just possesses a gun while engaged in some other crime, then the facts will show that he possesses the firearm for a reason other than defense of home, person, or property. Then the affirmative defense wouldn't apply. All this does is restrict the cases where POWPO applies to cases where the suspect is doing something to attract police attention.