Weed becomes legal

[James Peppard]

I was arrested in 1983 in MA for poss of weed (3 joints) I do not touch the stuff any more & I don't drink both going on 30 years now.
Question is. When it comes legal in November. Can this charge be taken off my record so I can finally buy a new gun from a dealer? I mean it's 35 years old and I've lived a good honorable life. I haven't had a ticket in over 25 years. . . . .

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Negative. Just because it's legal now doesn't excuse past violations when it was not. And it's still illegal at the Fed level.

The Constitution protects you from being prosecuted if an activity that is legal, becomes illegal. You can;t be prosecuted for doing said activity when it was legal. But there is no protection afford in the opposite. If an illegal activity becomes legal, arrests, convictions, etc. even those imprisoned, they don't go away.

 

[James Peppard]

Negative. Just because it's legal now doesn't excuse past violations when it was not. And it's still illegal at the Fed level.

The Constitution protects you from being prosecuted if an activity that is legal, becomes illegal. You can;t be prosecuted for doing said activity when it was legal. But there is no protection afford in the opposite. If an illegal activity becomes legal, arrests, convictions, etc. even those imprisoned, they don't go away.

Okay I understand that. I wanted some input on that. I have started an appeal it and see if I can get it annulled since it's been 35 years.
Figured it was worth a shot.

 

[James Peppard]

Some what on the same note I was at a benefit and donated $20 in a raffle knowing I wouldn't win. But I did.
I won a SIG 290 / 380cal. . . . .
Now being a resident of NH I thought it wouldn't be a problem getting it but due to my prior thread it is.
Any suggestions on how I might receive it or can I sell it through the dealer that is holding it for me?

 

[Len-2A Training]

MA does not annul anything, ever!

There is a way to reopen the case and get a different verdict however. You need a real good firearms attorney to work that one however.

Good luck!

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Sorry but you will not find many here willing to give advice to a prohibited person on how to acquire a firearm..

If you want to fight the fight, call a lawyer.

 

[chopper_man]

What were you convicted of? 3 joints made you federally prohibited? What am I missing?

 

[42!]

IANAL
But I found this interesting, apparently, under some very limited circumstances expungement is now a thing in MA. Don't know if drug possession is one that's allowed. How old you were and what the offence make a difference, I haven't read the whole thing yet.

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2018/Chapter69

Section 100G. (a) A petitioner who has a record of conviction may, on a form furnished by the commissioner and signed under the penalties of perjury, petition that the commissioner expunge the record. Upon receipt of a petition, the commissioner shall certify whether the petitioner is eligible for an expungement under sections 100I and 100J. If the petitioner is not eligible for an expungement under sections 100I and100J the commissioner shall, within 60 days of the request, deny the request in writing. If the petitioner is eligible for an expungement under sections 100I and 100J the commissioner shall, within 60 days of the petition, notify in writing the district attorney of the petition and that the petitioner is eligible for an expungement under sections100I and 100J. Within 60 days of receipt of notification from the commissioner of the filing of the petition and that petitioner is eligible for an expungement pursuant to sections 100I and 100J, the district attorney shall notify the commissioner in writing of their objections, if any, to the petition for the expungement.

Like Len said, talk to a good firearms attorney, there are other options.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

What were you convicted of? 3 joints made you federally prohibited? What am I missing?

Portioned out drugs like that could land you an intent to distribute charge...

 

[drgrant]

Negative. Just because it's legal now doesn't excuse past violations when it was not.

Not sure if serious, this isn't entirely true. If they make something "legal" that used to be "illegal" under some circumstances the bell can be partially unrung. Weed decrim in MA is fertile ground for this
particularly for amounts that would be allowed by current possession laws. He needs to talk to a lawyer regardless, though, before attempting an application.

-Mike

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Not sure if serious, this isn't entirely true. If they make something "legal" that used to be "illegal" under some circumstances the bell can be partially unrung. Weed decrim in MA is fertile ground for this
particularly for amounts that would be allowed by current possession laws. He needs to talk to a lawyer regardless, though, before attempting an application.

-Mike

You say that the bell can be unrung yet there hasn't been a single case where that has occurred yet for a drug charge in MA.

I suppose he could be the trailblazer... But it's unlikely.

 

[drgrant]

You say that the bell can be unrung yet there hasn't been a single case where that has occurred yet for a drug charge in MA.

Are you sure? Problem in MA is its tough to tell because when these things happen, there may be more than one way it can
happen. I think at one point Comm2a was looking for people with such convictions, but I could be mistaken.

Also as Len indicates, some of these could have been reopened and killed off that way, too.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

You say that the bell can be unrung yet there hasn't been a single case where that has occurred yet for a drug charge in MA.

Turns out you were double extra wrong.... Wesson V. Fowler ....

Wesson v. Fowler - Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. (comm2a.org)

https://www.comm2a.org/images/PDFs/wesson-decision.pdf

 

[Retired-LEO]

MA does not annul anything, ever!

There is a way to reopen the case and get a different verdict however. You need a real good firearms attorney to work that one however.

Good luck!

I know of felon(s) that got their record sealed and now have jobs with full police powers. So it's possible, but NOT probable.

I absolutely agree you need a Good Firearms Attorney.

 

[AHM]

I know of felon(s) that got their record sealed and now have jobs with full police powers.

Remember: it's all fun and games until some under-employed courthouse staffer
gets around to digitizing those "sealed" records and those felonies suddenly pop up on the radar.

Sure the "sealing" may be intended to entirely preclude such hijinks,
but never say never.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Turns out you were double extra wrong.... Wesson V. Fowler ....

Wesson v. Fowler - Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. (comm2a.org)

https://www.comm2a.org/images/PDFs/wesson-decision.pdf

ummm, no,Go back and actually READ the judgement. In that specific case the state passed a law in 1998 banning firearm possession for any drug crime. The problem was that they made it retroactive - which blatantly violates the constitution's double jeopardy clause of the 5th amendment. That specific provision of the law was rightfully stuck down.

As to the OPs case, or my original comment, that case has zero, none, nada, zip applicability here. Absolutely none.

In that example you cite no records were expunged, sealed and no court rendered verdicts were changed.

If the OP became a prohibited person because of his actions (maybe he caught an intent to distribute charge, he didn't say) then there's no changing his being a prohibited person. When he says he can't buy from a dealer - that means he's failing a NICs check. That means he's listed as a prohibited person. That means one can only assume - absent clarifying info from the OP, he caught a felony charge for that drug possession.

Read his 3rd post - he lives in NH now. They don't even have licenses there. It's constitutional carry. So if OP still can;t buy from a dealer in NH (as he says in post 1) then he caught a felony rap. Put the pieces together and it's the only explanation.

Else he would have no problem having a Mass dealer transfer said firearm to an NH dealer where he could pick it up. Once he passed the NICS check that is......

 

[drgrant]

ummm, no,Go back and actually READ the judgement. In that specific case the state passed a law in 1998 banning firearm possession for any drug crime. The problem was that they made it retroactive - which blatantly violates the constitution's double jeopardy clause of the 5th amendment. That specific provision of the law was rightfully stuck down.

As to the OPs case, or my original comment, that case has zero, none, nada, zip applicability here. Absolutely none.

In that example you cite no records were expunged, sealed and no court rendered verdicts were changed.

The effect was that the guy got his license though, and for the intended purpose the conviction became meaningless... which was the important thing.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Very true. You can't retroactively prosecute someone or re-punish them if the law changes. But that case doesn't help the OP. He's in NH where that case isn't even applicable. He's not being denied an MA LTC under that law. He's being denied the ability to purchase form a dealer by the Feds. That's an entirely different ball game.

Like I said before - if he can't buy firearms from a dealer in NH, he's got bigger problems then he's letting on and that specific case isn't applicable to his situation. It's applicable to people who live in mass, had a misdemeanor drug conviction before the law was passed, and the state used the law to deny an LTC after said law was passed.

 

[drgrant]

Mea culpa- reading comprehension fail on my part, for some reason I assumed he was in MA, probably because he didn't quite post in the best place, but if he is dealing with purely a NICS denial yes that's a different ballgame; but I still think it might be worth a consult with an MA gun attorney to see if the case could potentially be reopened and killed off. People have had worse things than a "few joints" cleaned off that way. It's no guarantee but it's something I would at least look at.

-Mike