Carry Permit With Felony
- Thread starter bigbadeli
- Start date
Don't lie on your CCW app, but with the Felony conviction I'm not sure you can even legally buy a hand gun from a FFL, expunged or not... When they run the background check it may come back denied, and that would be your answer real quick and simple....
Part of the process is fingerprinting and a full FBI check, if you come back dirty then NO.....
Part of the process is fingerprinting and a full FBI check, if you come back dirty then NO.....
You are legally entitled to a CCW, but that doesn't mean that your local CCW Board will like it. The case you want to read is Carr v Midland County, 259 Mich App 420, 674 NW2d 709 (2003) Here is the Google link:
Link Removed
I would check the "no" box as to whether you were convicted of a felony, but attach a copy of the expungment order and the car ruling. If you are in Wayne County, paper file your application. Don't efile it. You might have to appeal to Circuit Court on this one in some counties. While legally not required, if you have good evidence of rehabilitation, bring it to the hearing. A good way not to cave in on this point but present the issue is to discuss your rehabilitation in the context of the expungment, e.g.: We filed a petition for expungment in front of Judge O'Brien. My petition was accompanied by 32 reference letters from doctors, lawyers, bankers, and business people. We also presented evidence that I had matured over the years, completed college, got married, and held a job. Judge O'Brien stated that (s)he was tremendously impressed with my rehabilitation. In fact, the XXX County Prosecutor's Office [who the CCW Board probably works for] stated that it had no opposition to an expungment in my situation." If your offense was not a crime against a person, slip that in there as well.
A Michigan expungment restores firearm rights under federal law. You can hold political office, you can vote, and you can sit on the jury. Lastly, it restores firearm rights. A Michigan CCW permit also proves you meet federal standards. If your permit was issued after November 22, 2005, you are exempt from the NICS background check. See:
Link Removed
This was not always the case. Here is the old letter which would not apply to you:
ATF Open Letter to All Michigan Federal Firearms Licensees
Again, this letter is superseded, but someone always tries to toss it in my face so I thought I would get ahead of the issue.
Good luck.
Stu
Link Removed
I would check the "no" box as to whether you were convicted of a felony, but attach a copy of the expungment order and the car ruling. If you are in Wayne County, paper file your application. Don't efile it. You might have to appeal to Circuit Court on this one in some counties. While legally not required, if you have good evidence of rehabilitation, bring it to the hearing. A good way not to cave in on this point but present the issue is to discuss your rehabilitation in the context of the expungment, e.g.: We filed a petition for expungment in front of Judge O'Brien. My petition was accompanied by 32 reference letters from doctors, lawyers, bankers, and business people. We also presented evidence that I had matured over the years, completed college, got married, and held a job. Judge O'Brien stated that (s)he was tremendously impressed with my rehabilitation. In fact, the XXX County Prosecutor's Office [who the CCW Board probably works for] stated that it had no opposition to an expungment in my situation." If your offense was not a crime against a person, slip that in there as well.
A Michigan expungment restores firearm rights under federal law. You can hold political office, you can vote, and you can sit on the jury. Lastly, it restores firearm rights. A Michigan CCW permit also proves you meet federal standards. If your permit was issued after November 22, 2005, you are exempt from the NICS background check. See:
Link Removed
This was not always the case. Here is the old letter which would not apply to you:
ATF Open Letter to All Michigan Federal Firearms Licensees
Again, this letter is superseded, but someone always tries to toss it in my face so I thought I would get ahead of the issue.
Good luck.
Stu
72cinjin
New member
I can add a tad of insight on this. I had 7 felonies, that's s-e-v-e-n felonies, I was charged and convicted of when I was 21. My idiot boyfriend talked me into doing something very, very stupid that was supposed to have been legal. In my naivety, I went along with it. I was hit in the months ahead with 7 charges involving conspiracy to sell guns illegally, conspiracy to remove/alter serial numbers, etc, etc... Anyway, I cooperated with the investigation fully, as the activities going on were absolutely illegal and I realized I had been severely taken advantage of. Not to mention, I was 8 months pregnant when the investigation of my involvement started. I think the detectives took pity on my and my naivety of the situation and granted me a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for a program that, after 3 years of following through with monthly probation officer visits and squeaky clean behavior, all of this would disappear. So, I followed through, did as instructed, and all seven charges were expunged. I was told that the only way the charges would ever show up is if the FBI did a specialized search for any weapons charges, and that they could only do this if I was criminally involved in a weapons case. Two years after I mailed in my last probation "check-in" paper (I had moved out of state and they allowed me to report via mail, monthly, for the last year), I filled out the paperwork to purchase a small Lorcen .22, as it was all I could afford, as I was deathly afraid of my ex-husband (the one who had duped me into getting involved with his pals in the first place). He was a vile, evil man, and that's I will say on that. So, 14 days after I filled out the paperwork, the store owner called me up and said I was good to go, and I only needed to go bring this and that to the local police station where they could get my prints. Sweating bullets, I headed to the station from the gun shop and handed the officer my license, permit and the .22. He said it would just take a minute, and, after a minute or so, he handed me my pistol permit and walked out owning the gun. 14 years later, I decided I wanted to start concealing. I went in, got fully fingerprinted, took the passport photo at a local WalGreens, took the safety class, and was not denied. I have had a CPL for some time now, owning many different handguns and long guns. The state where the convictions took place in 1992, was Connecticut. The state I moved to (and still reside in) is Michigan. I am not sure if what states this all occurred in make a difference as to obtaining a CPL after having a record expunged or not, but considering Connecticut is one of the more liberal, gun-unfriendly states, I'd have to say expunged means expunged. I am here to say that those charges no longer exist on my record, that is, unless I am involved in some sort of illegal gun activity. I can assure you, 18 years does something to a person's level of wisdom, and looking back on my past, I really wish I had known then what I know today. EDIT: Also- I am legally allowed to check "NO" on every form I will ever fill out in the future that asks if I have ever been convicted of a felony. This INCLUDES firearms-related paperwork!
Big Gay Al
New member
And to think, some people say there is no God. If there wasn't, I'd bet you'd still be in deep do-do. :smile:
p.s. Glad it all worked out in your favor, in the end.
I looked at my old response and wish to correct something. I think you can simply answer "no" to the form. The provision I was thinking of (MCL 780.623) does provide that an expunged conviction is a conviction for licensing purposes, but only for professions licensed by the judiciary. The only one I know of that meets that definition is "attorneys." We have it beaten into us in law school that we should "disclose, disclose, and disclose" and that more people are denied admission to the bar for trying to hide a record than who are actually denied by the record. I think it influenced my general practice.
Something I ran into that is interesting is the number of states which say that a person who is pardoned in another state is still a convicted felon in that state. Tennessee has a big case going on with respect to an individual who was convicted of a drug offense in Georgia and then got a full pardon from the Georgia Pardon Board. Tennessee is arguing that he is still a convicted felon within the meaning of TN law.
What hasn't completely shaken out is the question of what if you are an ex-con with your rights restored (either by expungment or pardon) and a CPL who travels to a state with reciprocity (49 out of 50 states) and then gets stopped with a gun. Can a state (say TN) go behind the CPL or does the reciprocity require them to accept it. A lot of DAs don't like the concept of former offenders having guns and I've seen a few of these cases. For example, the issue has come up in California with a guy with a Montana pardon.
Something I ran into that is interesting is the number of states which say that a person who is pardoned in another state is still a convicted felon in that state. Tennessee has a big case going on with respect to an individual who was convicted of a drug offense in Georgia and then got a full pardon from the Georgia Pardon Board. Tennessee is arguing that he is still a convicted felon within the meaning of TN law.
What hasn't completely shaken out is the question of what if you are an ex-con with your rights restored (either by expungment or pardon) and a CPL who travels to a state with reciprocity (49 out of 50 states) and then gets stopped with a gun. Can a state (say TN) go behind the CPL or does the reciprocity require them to accept it. A lot of DAs don't like the concept of former offenders having guns and I've seen a few of these cases. For example, the issue has come up in California with a guy with a Montana pardon.
Treo
Bullet Proof
Wouldn't that be under "full faith and credit"?
It is not that easy. There is a ton of authority that says that pardons are not entitled to full faith and credit. Consider this quote:
Yascovone v Bolger, 645 F2d 1028 (DC Cir 1981). Note: every case I am citing is available on Google Scholar (scholar.google.com).
Moreover, a state has to treat another state's ruling the same as it treats its own. For example, a state which does not have legal gambling would not have to enforce a judgment for an unpaid casino debt entered by a Nevada court.
Tennessee does not restore the right for former offenders convicted of drug offenses to own firearms. Georgia does. Tennessee pardon's don't fully wipeout/expunge a criminal record; Georgia's do. Tennessee's pardons are issued by the Governor; Georgia's are issued by a Pardon Board. Georgia is probably more liberal about granting pardons than Tennessee is.
The area of wiping out/rehabilitating former offender rights is very different from state-to-state both in theory and practice and DA's/cops don't like it when a former offender gets rights back (records cleared) where a similar clearance wouldn't take place in their home state.
California expungments don't restore firearm rights and California has a history of ignoring out-of-state pardons. Here is a link to a 1974 decision refusing to recognize a Montana pardon restoring firearm rights. Federal statutory law changed in the interim. Congress has mandated that a state restoration of firearm rights will be honored. The discussion about pardons (and expungments) is therefore relevant:
Link Removed
Here are a few more similar cases:
Link Removed
Here is a case that says that state expungment (expunction) laws are entitled to even less respect than a full pardon:
Link Removed
I'm only tossing this in the mix in case someone is thinking that the OP was talking about an expungment, not a pardon. (Some states call them expunctions). The law on the two beasts is generally the same -- it is a state act of grace given to an individual who has demonstrated rehabilitation so that they can restart their life. In fact, the Supreme Court precedent on this point (Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc., 460 U.S. 103, 103 S.Ct. 986, 74 L.Ed.2d 845 (1983)) ruled that a state expungment was not binding on the federal government. The Dickerson Court noted: "an expunction under state law does not alter the historical fact of the conviction, . . . as does positive or `affirmative action'. . . . [E]xpunction does not alter the legality of the previous conviction and does not signify that the defendant is innocent of the crime to which he pleaded guilty."
There have been cases where individuals are innocent of the federal felon in possession law, but still guilty of it under state law.
My general advice to clients with pardons and/or expungments is not to travel out-of-state with the weapons. If they refuse to follow this advice, I recommend they get a CPL (even for long guns) because of the additional reciprocity arguments they can make and because it might pause the cop.
Unrelated to firearms, but while I am on the topic -- be very careful checking the "no box" to the federal government about whether you have ever been convicted an offense. As the Dickerson quote demonstrates, the feds can look through it. For example, I go to Canada alot (sans gun) and got a Nexus card to go through the expedited clearance lane. Nexus defines "conviction" to include expunged or pardoned convictions. They want to know about them, but I think they still will give you the card at the end of the day at least they do with Canadian pardons.
Unfortunately, this is a trick bag. Anyone with a sheltered, expunged, rehabilitated, or pardoned conviction has to really be a lawyer to know when and how much they can rely on the pardon. As one of my earlier posts demonstrates, even being a lawyer doesn't mean that you are always right. If I trusted Congress, I would suggest that we needed a uniform law addressing the issue, but I don't trust them on this for obvious reasons.
Stu
The courts that have considered this issue are united on certain principles. First, it is agreed that the constitutional full faith and credit clause, Art. 4, § 1, does not reach the question of what effect federal entities must give state pardons. United States v. Matassini, 565 F.2d 1297 (5th Cir. 1978); United States v. Sutton, 521 F.2d 1385 (7th Cir. 1975); Thrall v. Wolfe, 503 F.2d 313 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 972, 95 S.Ct. 1392, 43 L.Ed.2d 652 (1975).
Yascovone v Bolger, 645 F2d 1028 (DC Cir 1981). Note: every case I am citing is available on Google Scholar (scholar.google.com).
Moreover, a state has to treat another state's ruling the same as it treats its own. For example, a state which does not have legal gambling would not have to enforce a judgment for an unpaid casino debt entered by a Nevada court.
Tennessee does not restore the right for former offenders convicted of drug offenses to own firearms. Georgia does. Tennessee pardon's don't fully wipeout/expunge a criminal record; Georgia's do. Tennessee's pardons are issued by the Governor; Georgia's are issued by a Pardon Board. Georgia is probably more liberal about granting pardons than Tennessee is.
The area of wiping out/rehabilitating former offender rights is very different from state-to-state both in theory and practice and DA's/cops don't like it when a former offender gets rights back (records cleared) where a similar clearance wouldn't take place in their home state.
California expungments don't restore firearm rights and California has a history of ignoring out-of-state pardons. Here is a link to a 1974 decision refusing to recognize a Montana pardon restoring firearm rights. Federal statutory law changed in the interim. Congress has mandated that a state restoration of firearm rights will be honored. The discussion about pardons (and expungments) is therefore relevant:
Link Removed
Here are a few more similar cases:
Link Removed
Here is a case that says that state expungment (expunction) laws are entitled to even less respect than a full pardon:
Link Removed
I'm only tossing this in the mix in case someone is thinking that the OP was talking about an expungment, not a pardon. (Some states call them expunctions). The law on the two beasts is generally the same -- it is a state act of grace given to an individual who has demonstrated rehabilitation so that they can restart their life. In fact, the Supreme Court precedent on this point (Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc., 460 U.S. 103, 103 S.Ct. 986, 74 L.Ed.2d 845 (1983)) ruled that a state expungment was not binding on the federal government. The Dickerson Court noted: "an expunction under state law does not alter the historical fact of the conviction, . . . as does positive or `affirmative action'. . . . [E]xpunction does not alter the legality of the previous conviction and does not signify that the defendant is innocent of the crime to which he pleaded guilty."
There have been cases where individuals are innocent of the federal felon in possession law, but still guilty of it under state law.
My general advice to clients with pardons and/or expungments is not to travel out-of-state with the weapons. If they refuse to follow this advice, I recommend they get a CPL (even for long guns) because of the additional reciprocity arguments they can make and because it might pause the cop.
Unrelated to firearms, but while I am on the topic -- be very careful checking the "no box" to the federal government about whether you have ever been convicted an offense. As the Dickerson quote demonstrates, the feds can look through it. For example, I go to Canada alot (sans gun) and got a Nexus card to go through the expedited clearance lane. Nexus defines "conviction" to include expunged or pardoned convictions. They want to know about them, but I think they still will give you the card at the end of the day at least they do with Canadian pardons.
Unfortunately, this is a trick bag. Anyone with a sheltered, expunged, rehabilitated, or pardoned conviction has to really be a lawyer to know when and how much they can rely on the pardon. As one of my earlier posts demonstrates, even being a lawyer doesn't mean that you are always right. If I trusted Congress, I would suggest that we needed a uniform law addressing the issue, but I don't trust them on this for obvious reasons.
Stu
New Threads
-
Recent TX Appeals Court declaration that ATF arm brace rule is unconstitutional
- Started by lw07
- Replies: 0
-
Hunter Constantine or Phlster Enigma, for running?
- Started by sigsag1
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Members online
No members online now.