instructor did everything a reasonable person would do to try to conform to the law but he stands convicted of three felony counts of possession of short firearms based entirely on a statute that fails to define how to measure a firearm each gun the way he measured it satisfied the life requirements but the measurements used to convict him were based on federal regulations nowhere found in the illinois statute thus the state failed to prove that mr first firearms were too short under the illinois statute illinois statute is unconstitutionally vague for failing to supply how the guns must be measured and mr process rights were violated when he was given felony penalties for innocent conduct without proof of a culpable mental state for all these reasons these three felony convictions must be reverse turning to the first issue the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that shrek first firearms were too short under the illinois statute because that statute only specifies the length requirements of a shotgun must be twenty six inches in length overall a rifle barrel must be sixteen inches long but the statute doesn't say how to measure those measured from the tip of the barrel to the tip of the stock but both of the shotguns were twenty six inches or longer and the rifle barrel was sixteen inches or longer including the flash suppressor the principle of london he says ambiguity in a criminal statute must be  resolved in a manner that favors the accused as long as it doesn't violate the intent of the legislature for the shotgun his state concedes that there are at least two ways to measure the shotguns consistent with the intent of the statute and the travelers method was one of those so because because this is a criminal statute because it's ambiguous in that way the statute must be interpreted to allow from the tip of the barrel to the tip of the stock it includes it includes everything in the in the gun and it's a it's at least as reasonable or  on the gun to a kind of a projected point i'm that is not on the gun so for that for the shotguns the way interpreting overall  because it's part of the cylinder through which the the bullet travels and although the federal regulations say that the flash suppressor must be permanently attached in order to be measured the illinois did not hear it did not reference those federal regulations so again because this is a criminal statute because it's ambiguous or that there are there's more than one way to measure this  that is defined in reference to  right that's what's missing be reversed turning to the second closely related issue the illinois statute as i'm constitutionally they because it does not provide a person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to distinguish between lawful and unlawful conduct and it doesn't adequately define the offense to ensure consistent and enforcement so as the state conceded and as we already discussed some of the key terms peril and overall length must be interpreted with their playing an ordinary meanings however the state had to present and out of state federal firearms expert in order to show that the a t f standards and industry  suppressor is not considered part of the barrel for the measurement and the overall length for a shotgun has to be measured parallel to the barrel bore so the fact that the  state would call an expert to explain the correct way to measure shows that these methods of measurement are not outside the knowledge of the average person and that courts and juries and enforcement officers are likely to apply statute differently so again because the statute is unconstitutionally bay truck first convictions based on the statute must be reverse turning to the third  issue the vagueness of the statute was compounded in this case because the state was not required to prove a guilty mental state so this because the statute was vague it was hard to know if the guns were too short but then mr applied to every element so here that means that the state needed to prove not only that shuffler knowingly possessed the guns but that he knew that the guns were too short to fit illinois gun statute and held that the state had to prove that the defendant knew the feature that made the gun illegal or else the statute would violate due process for punishing innocent conduct with a felony so that's that's what happened here and again because the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that mr schaffel or knew the characteristics that made the gun illegal his felony convictions violate the process and must where boil down to but this court does not have to make a definitive determination in every single case cited illinois you have to measure one way or the other this is not strictly this is not beyond reasonable doubt here we have testimony or evidence stipulated testimony that the gun was measured using the a t f standards and using the standards bought used by the industry on the stretcher with the statutory language what the statutory language says that the overall length is under twenty six says we have the officer testifying i measured the overall length of the gun and it was under twenty six cents from the barrel to the end of the gun which would be diagonally well of course right would that be incorrect but it's like you gotta buy a fifty inch t v set you're not going to exp there's no evidence presented below as to why they do that here best case and why you think i could because i don't understand why i really don't know either i think the best guess is that was inches wonder could be gravy four inches longer for whatever reason that you would certainly say well this is long enough to address the concerns we don't want it to be easily hidden  book presenting countering evidence that says no it was twenty seven years i think given all this discussion we've had is it unclear as to how you measure and how can you determine whether or not a person has violated the law when you don't know the federal regulations but that's what i'm just saying he's saying that it's big because i could not anticipate that the state would be measuring parallel to the barrel  know the evidence whether or not he was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt how can he know based on the statute what he's required to do or not do we were having this huge discussion regarding how you measure and what's the proper way to really not disputed here right i mean you're not disputing that the way the defendant measured it comply if you measure it that way and if it is really not disputing the way the state measured it it doesn't comply if you measure it that way i mean isn't that is simply not part of the right what about a barrel extension now this is where you know having a little bit of knowledge can be dangerous but i know having watched the olympics the winter olympics by athletes who a cross country skiers who rifles they actually have screws on their own extensions to help them side in the target it's a continuation of the barrel that's actually screwed down i was that different to the end of an existing barrel cannot be con cannot constitute the barrel itself the only cases i find a cite on i cited in my case was to federal cases that did not refer to the federal measurement it's like you have a have a bend that the clip you know has a certain look clips over the end the bullet now fire through that circle does that mean that you now measure from the end of the band that because you're firing through this little circle what's the purpose that you think of this legislative provision regarding the length of brief isn't concealed wouldn't the presence of a flash processor have the same the fact is if the barrel were long as long as the flash suppressors long that is if it were possible for a permit so that the ease of concealment matter into question ok he's got plastic pressure in one room and the rifle in another room if you put the two together is now long enough does that mean that the defend the skate rifle is long enough because he could have made it long enough as part of the rifle that way it's no different than the other way the sense would say that just because he mishmash with measured and now has a gun is too short that he should be able to avoid prosecution because he contradicts that claim also so there was some discussion about the the industry standard of a television set that a person should be required that the industry standard is what an ordinary person would be required to know by the significant difference between the the measurement method of a television set and these guns is that you don't get a felony penalty for missed measuring a television set so the the consequences are very different here also but the state was saying that mr truck was a was a licensed fire federal firearms dealer so he would be aware of the federal regulations however there's no evidence of what what's required to get such a license it's not it's not clear that any knowledge it's not clear what knowledge would be required for that license and finally so that this i'm not sure but it seemed as though the state was suggesting that that the police measured these guns one way and mr chef were measured another way and mismeasured but in this case actually the  e federal a t f expert who did the measurements measured both ways so so this is not like a professional measurement versus a a lay person's measurement but they they asked both