LTC ineligibility minimum sentencing?

scheming

scheming

Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
1,657
Likes
573
Feedback: 12 / 0 / 0
I know I've read this here before, but I just can't find it.

What are the statutory ineligibility requirements for an LTC in MA?
As in, what is the min/max criminal punishment sentencing that makes someone automatically ineligible for an LTC?

Preferably with citation to MGL.


Thanks for the help.
 
I think it's if the crime has a possible sentence of 1.5 years such as DUI.

It's all in Ch. 140
 
If the possible maximum sentence is more than two years, regardless of the actual sentence imposed, you can be statutorily prohibited from
possessing firearms
 
The 2 year thing is also Federal, for life. That means a MA dui after 1994 not only prohibits you from getting an LTC, it prohibits you from EVER posessing fireams in the US for life.
 
I believe any misdemeanor charges related to drugs or violence are also disqualifying events. I'm sure most of those carry potential sentences of 2yrs or more, but there may be some domestic violence or simple possession charges that are less. Also, any misdemeanor charges involving weapons possession or transportation.
 
Clear as mud... M.G.L. Ch. 140 § 131

A prohibited person shall be a person who:

(i) has, in a court of the commonwealth, been convicted or adjudicated a youthful offender or delinquent child, both as defined in section 52 of chapter 119, for the commission of (A) a felony; (B) a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for more than 2 years ; (C) a violent crime as defined in section 121; (D) a violation of any law regulating the use, possession, ownership, transfer, purchase, sale, lease, rental, receipt or transportation of weapons or ammunition for which a term of imprisonment may be imposed; (E) a violation of any law regulating the use, possession or sale of a controlled substance as defined in section 1 of chapter 94C including, but not limited to, a violation of said chapter 94C; or (F) a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33);

(ii) has, in any other state or federal jurisdiction, been convicted or adjudicated a youthful offender or delinquent child for the commission of (A) a felony; (B) a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for more than 2 years; (C) a violent crime as defined in section 121; (D) a violation of any law regulating the use, possession, ownership, transfer, purchase, sale, lease, rental, receipt or transportation of weapons or ammunition for which a term of imprisonment may be imposed; (E) a violation of any law regulating the use, possession or sale of a controlled substance as defined in said section 1 of said chapter 94C including, but not limited to, a violation of said chapter 94C; or (F) a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33);

(iii) is or has been (A) committed to a hospital or institution for mental illness, alcohol or substance abuse, except a commitment pursuant to sections 35 or 36C of chapter 123, unless after 5 years from the date of the confinement, the applicant submits with the application an affidavit of a licensed physician or clinical psychologist attesting that such physician or psychologist is familiar with the applicant's mental illness, alcohol or substance abuse and that in the physician's or psychologist's opinion, the applicant is not disabled by a mental illness, alcohol or substance abuse in a manner that shall prevent the applicant from possessing a firearm, rifle or shotgun; (B) committed by a court order to a hospital or institution for mental illness, unless the applicant was granted a petition for relief of the court order pursuant to said section 36C of said chapter 123 and submits a copy of the court order with the application; (C) subject to an order of the probate court appointing a guardian or conservator for a incapacitated person on the grounds that the applicant lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage the applicant's affairs, unless the applicant was granted a petition for relief of the order of the probate court pursuant to section 56C of chapter 215 and submits a copy of the order of the probate court with the application; or (D) found to be a person with an alcohol use disorder or substance use disorder or both and committed pursuant to said section 35 of said chapter 123, unless the applicant was granted a petition for relief of the court order pursuant to said section 35 and submits a copy of the court order with the application;

(iv) is younger than 21 years of age at the time of the application;

(v) is an alien who does not maintain lawful permanent residency;

(vi) is currently subject to: (A) an order for suspension or surrender issued pursuant to sections 3B or 3C of chapter 209A or a similar order issued by another jurisdiction; or (B) a permanent or temporary protection order issued pursuant to said chapter 209A or a similar order issued by another jurisdiction, including any order described in 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8);

(vii) is currently the subject of an outstanding arrest warrant in any state or federal jurisdiction;

(viii) has been discharged from the armed forces of the United States under dishonorable conditions;

(ix) is a fugitive from justice; or

(x) having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced that citizenship.
 
Mr. Brownstone said:
The 2 year thing is also Federal, for life. That means a MA dui after 1994 not only prohibits you from getting an LTC, it prohibits you from EVER possessing firearms in the US for life.
Click to expand...
thank god i smartened up in 88!!! I was actually able to get my LTC in beverly in 94 after a ****up
 
Mr. Brownstone said:
The 2 year thing is also Federal, for life. That means a MA dui after 1994 not only prohibits you from getting an LTC, it prohibits you from EVER posessing fireams in the US for life.
Click to expand...

Federally, yes.
Some states like TX will allow you to possess a gun in your home 5 years after your release.
Must have to purchase the gun privately though? Or maybe build it?

Under Texas state law a convicted felon may possess a firearm in the residence, in which he lives, once five years have elapsed from the date his sentence was discharged. This means the later of release from prison or parole. This is not true under federal law. So, while a convicted felony could lawfully possess a firearm in these very limited circumstance under state law, he could possibly be charged and convicted under federal law, even though current federal policy is to defer to state law on this issue.
Click to expand...
 
caplaw said:
MGL. c 140 Section 131 (ii) - any felony or a misdemeanor punishable by more than 2 years
Click to expand...

swatgig said:
Clear as mud... M.G.L. Ch. 140 § 131

A prohibited person shall be a person who:

(ii) has, in any other state or federal jurisdiction, been convicted or adjudicated a youthful offender or delinquent child for the commission of (A) a felony; (B) a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for more than 2 years; (C) a violent crime as defined in section 121; (D) a violation of any law regulating the use, possession, ownership, transfer, purchase, sale, lease, rental, receipt or transportation of weapons or ammunition for which a term of imprisonment may be imposed; (E) a violation of any law regulating the use, possession or sale of a controlled substance as defined in said section 1 of said chapter 94C including, but not limited to, a violation of said chapter 94C; or (F) a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33);
Click to expand...


Thanks. Exactly what I was looking for.
 
And a couple that are often missed:

- Failure to report a hotel fire

- Receipt for deposit by insolvent banking institution
 
Rob Boudrie said:
And a couple that are often missed:

- Failure to report a hotel fire

- Receipt for deposit by insolvent banking institution
Click to expand...

Causing Injury in a Physical Exercise Program
Resisting Arrest (one of those add on charges that if we can't **** you one way, we'll still **** you anyways).
Shoplifting Over $100
Falsely Obtaining Commercial Computer Service
False Statement to Motor Vehicle Insurer
Receiving Stolen Property Under $250

https://web.archive.org/web/2005103..._pdfs/Misdemeanor Conviction Disqualifier.pdf
 
I just find it incomprehensible that a Constitutional Right can be taken away from you for life because of a misdemeanor. How is this even possible? Hell, that shouldn't even be the case except for violent felonies.
 
Individualist said:
I just find it incomprehensible that a Constitutional Right can be taken away from you for life because of a misdemeanor. How is this even possible? Hell, that shouldn't even be the case except for violent felonies.
Click to expand...

The federal "felon in possession" law bans the possession of firearms and ammo by felons. So it has to define "felony". Because of our system of laws, that isn't as simple as it might sound. Most (all?) federal felonies are felonies for the purpose of this law; but what about state laws?

Different states have different laws. Some criminal acts are felonies in one jurisdiction but misdemeanors in another. So the federal law states that for the purpose of this law, a conviction is considered a felony if it is a felony OR if it is a misdemeanor punishable by more than two years in prison.

Then MA legislators come along in a fit of being tough on drunk drivers and raise the punishment for first time drunk driving to be a misdemeanor punishable by up to 2 1/2 years. So now, a first time drunk driving conviction in MA is considered as a felony under the federal felon in possession law.

And that is how a misdemeanor, for which you would likely not serve any time in jail, becomes a lifetime prohibition on gun ownership.
 
LoginName said:
If the possible maximum sentence is more than two years, regardless of the actual sentence imposed, you can be statutorily prohibited from
possessing firearms
Click to expand...

The federal statutory disqualifier is conviction of a felony which is federally defined (for firearms purposes) as including any offense punishable by more than 1 year incarceration, except for state misdemeanors punishable by not more than 2 years incarceration.

e.g. A Connecticut conviction for CGS 30-86 (Sale or Delivery of Alcohol to Minors, Intoxicated Persons, or Habitual Drunkards) faces a maximum penalty of 18 months imprisonment and/or a fine of $1500. 30-86 does not describe the classification of the offense. However CGS 53a-25 and 53a-26 define a felony as any offense punishable by more than 1 year imprisonment and Misdomeanor as any offense punishable by less than 1 year imprisonment. Ergo, a person with a Connecticut conviction of 30-86 would be federally prohibited despite the maximum 18 month sentence.

Contrarily, a Massachusetts charge c. 21C s. 5 (Hazardous Waste Collection, Transportation, Storage- the first 2 year misD on the master crime list) is punishable by 2 years incarceration (house of correction) which would mean that it would not trigger a federal prohibition- despite the 2 year sentence.
 
Individualist said:
I just find it incomprehensible that a Constitutional Right can be taken away from you for life because of a misdemeanor. How is this even possible? Hell, that shouldn't even be the case except for violent felonies.
Click to expand...

It's because MA is a bunch of faggots and the legislators have made laws, called them misdemeanors, and assigned them punishment brackets that don't fall in line with being misdemeanors. Other states don't have this problem and clearly delineate one from the other, and usually the line is very similar to the federal line.

ETA: It also doesn't help that MA just has more stupid ****ing laws in general. For example in NH carrying under the influence isn't even illegal.... not that I would ever advise it... but the difference is in NH in a non shit town someone would get thrown in the drunk tank for the night and get their gun back when they were sober, provided there were no aggravating charges..... on the other hand MA it's effectively worse than DUI as there's no fixed protocol for it, and then you have to play games with a court to prove you weren't intoxicated...... MA doesn't even have a middle ground, say where they hit someone with a fine and suspend their LTC for a year... its just "**** you and your rights, we're going to try to take them away".

-Mike
 
Last edited:
LoginName said:
If the possible maximum sentence is more than two years, regardless of the actual sentence imposed, you can be statutorily prohibited from
possessing firearms
Click to expand...
AND... it is the possible maximum sentence at the time of the sentencing.... not today's maximum.
 
bostonasphalt2 said:
NO, because I doubt that TX law also restores any lost right to vote, sit on a jury, hold public office, etc.
Click to expand...
The corollary is though, a lot of other states (I'm not sure TX is one) offer things like expungement programs or procedures for various menial crimes. MA does almost none of that. In a lot of other states at least you can go through expungement and create the legal fiction of the entire event not happening... which gets you your rights back. MA offers none of that shit unless you can get a lawyer to overturn the original conviction based on proof of some kind of malfeasance on the part of the police, prosecutor, a witness, etc. That;s a lot more difficult and expensive than an expungement, which is pretty much "wait a few years (depending on jurisdiction) file some paperwork, come to court, and show everyone you're not a moron anymore."

-Mike

- - - Updated - - -

spt_1955 said:
AND... it is the possible maximum sentence at the time of the sentencing.... not today's maximum.
Click to expand...

This is important, and that's why pre-may-94 first offense DUIs in MA basically don't count... (outside of suitability, but a PD has to be complete douchebags to deny for a DUI that occurred that long ago) because that's the date that the law changed to increase the punishment.

-Mike
 
sofryj said:
I believe any misdemeanor charges related to drugs or violence are also disqualifying events. I'm sure most of those carry potential sentences of 2yrs or more, but there may be some domestic violence or simple possession charges that are less. Also, any misdemeanor charges involving weapons possession or transportation.
Click to expand...
Yup, and this includes "failure to report a hotel fire" as well as "receipt for deposit by insolvent banking institution".

It is not "any misdemeanor involving weapons" but "any crime involving weapons for which a jail or prison term may be imposed"

The corollary is though, a lot of other states (I'm not sure TX is one) offer things like expungement programs or procedures for various menial crimes. MA does almost none of that. In a lot of other states at least you can go through expungement and create the legal fiction of the entire event not happening...
Click to expand...
Some states (CA and NV for example) have sentences that make one a felon for a period of time, then the felony is wiped off the record. Chumlee just got one of these deals for the drug/gun crimes in NV.
 
sofryj said:
I believe any misdemeanor charges related to drugs or violence are also disqualifying events. I'm sure most of those carry potential sentences of 2yrs or more, but there may be some domestic violence or simple possession charges that are less. Also, any misdemeanor charges involving weapons possession or transportation.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. I have seen on here (I think Comm2A assisted in a lawsuit) that someone convicted of a misdemeanor pot charge is NOT a PP, under federal or state law.
 
PennyPincher said:
Incorrect. I have seen on here (I think Comm2A assisted in a lawsuit) that someone convicted of a misdemeanor pot charge is NOT a PP, under federal or state law.
Click to expand...
1. It took two separate suits, over the same issue, before the state conceded that the policy needed to be changed.

2. Comm2a did not "assist in the lawsuits". Comm2A obtained counsel, paid for it, and managed the case strategy with the attorney.

But, the real heros in this story are all those people who donated to Comm2A to fund this sort of thing.
 
Last edited:
PennyPincher said:
Incorrect. I have seen on here (I think Comm2A assisted in a lawsuit) that someone convicted of a misdemeanor pot charge is NOT a PP, under federal or state law.
Click to expand...

Well, this is because possession under an ounce is no longer a misdemeanor.... it's a civil infraction, not much different than a traffic violation. So people who were previously convicted of "a small amount of pot" offenses now can get their rights back because you can't prohibit the change in the law from extending to old convictions. So if some guy had .75 ounce of weed conviction 10 years ago, he should, in theory, reap the benefit of the new law which reduced the penalty/state of the crime. There's a legal term for this which I can't remember offhand...

-Mike
 
Well, this is because possession under an ounce is no longer a misdemeanor.... it's a civil infraction, not much different than a traffic violation. So people who were previously convicted of "a small amount of pot" offenses now can get their rights back because you can't prohibit the change in the law from extending to old convictions.
Click to expand...
This is not accurate. It is quite possible, and legal, for a law change to not apply retroactively.

When something is legalized, it does not undo convictions or penalties for former offenses. I am referring specifically to legislation to legalize; not a finding by a court that a law was invalid (in which case past convictions would likely be voided). For example, the change to CO and WA law did not automatically erase criminal records for previous MJ possession charges.

We did, however, use several arguments in the MJ/LTC cases to prove that the prohibition was an infringement on 2A rights. The fact that the same offense, today, could not be used against an applicant was one of those arguments. Another was the fact that previous MJ use would not preclude one from becoming an FBI agent, Air Mashall, or other federal LEO.

So if some guy had .75 ounce of weed conviction 10 years ago, he should, in theory, reap the benefit of the new law which reduced the penalty/state of the crime. There's a legal term for this which I can't remember offhand...
Click to expand...
The legal term is " ex post facto", and it works in the other directions. You cannot apply a penalty on someone for something that was legal at the time they did it, but now prohibited. For example, the govt cannot prosecute someone who went to Thailand to child sex prior to the federal law making this outside of jurisdiction activity a US federal crime.

Ex post facto is ignored when it comes to the penalty of gun rights removal. Felons were retroactively punished in 1934, as were domestic violence convicts after the Lautenberg amendment.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

LTC renewal question
Replies
4
Views
163
Sam P
S
LTC PD Boston 😔
Replies
8
Views
269
M1911
M1911
LTC Turnaround Woburn?
Replies
1
Views
181
2-4-5 Trioxin
2-4-5 Trioxin
Expiring medical marijuana card and obtaining LTC
2 3
Replies
82
Views
1K
cams
cams
MA Out of state LTC
Replies
19
Views
364
drgrant
drgrant
Back
Top Bottom