Source: http://masscases.com/cases/app/78/78massappct413.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 02:02:16+00:00

Document:
COMMONWEALTH vs. CLINT A. CORNELIUS.
Present: TRAINOR, BROWN, & WOLOHOJIAN, JJ.
This court concluded that new residents of the Commonwealth and certain returning residents, by satisfying the firearm identification card exception set forth in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), thereby satisfy the firearm possession exception set forth in G. L c.269, § 10(a)(4), for a limited period of time, without also having to comply with the provisions of G. L. c. 140, § 131G (relating to nonresidents) [416-419]; however, satisfaction of the firearm identification card exception in § 129C(j) does not provide a defense to a charge of violating G. L c. 269, § 10(m), which prohibits the possession of a large capacity weapon without a license [419-420].
INDICTMENT found and returned in the Superior Court Department on August 14, 2007.
Questions of law were reported by Judd J. Carhart, J.
Michael J. Traft (Richard J. Sinnott with him) for the defendant.
Steven Greenbaum, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.
"1. Whether G. L. c. 269, § 10(a) requires proof that a defendant 'carried' a firearm?
"2. Whether satisfaction of the firearm identification card exception set out in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), by itself, satisfies the firearm possession exemption set out in G. L. c. 269, § 10(a)(4)?
"3. Whether satisfaction of the firearm identification card exception set out in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j) is a defense for a violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10(m)?"
The judge included a summary of the essential facts as alleged by the Commonwealth and the defendant.
and a rifle. When Gorman learned that the weapons now were in her car, Gorman protested. The defendant returned to the lot and transferred the weapons back to his car. On or about March 3, 2007, the defendant was trespassed [sic] from the campus and moved to a hotel in Hadley.
"The shot gun was loaded with two rounds of ammunition."
Question one: "Whether G. L. c. 269, § 10(a) requires proof that a defendant 'carried' a firearm?"
The answer to question one is "no," G. L. c. 269, § 10(a), does not require proof that a defendant "carried" a firearm.	Question two: "Whether satisfaction of the firearm identification card exception set out in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), by itself, satisfies the firearm possession exemption set out in G. L. c. 269, § 10(a)(4)?"
Pursuant to G. L. c. 269, § 10(a), a person must either possess a valid license, or qualify for one of the exemptions to the licensing requirements, in order to "knowingly ha[ve] in his possession; or knowingly ha[ve] under his control in a vehicle[,]" a firearm within the Commonwealth. [Note 4] The language at issue here is the provision contained in § 10(a)(4) which exempts those who have "complied with the provisions of sections one hundred and twenty-nine C and one hundred and thirty-one G of chapter one hundred and forty[.]"
"No person, other than a licensed dealer or one who has been issued a license to carry a pistol or revolver or an exempt person as hereinafter described, shall own or possess any firearm, rifle, shotgun or ammunition unless he has been issued a firearm identification card by the licensing authority pursuant to the provisions of section one hundred and twenty-nine B."
Exempt persons, uses, and circumstances are defined in subsections (a) through (u) inclusive. Subsection (j) of § 129C provides a sixty-day grace period for certain persons, temporarily exempting them from the requirements of § 129C. [Note 5] We must determine whether the exemption for new and returning residents contained in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), by itself, satisfies the firearm exemption contained in G. L. c. 269, § 10(a)(4).
The Commonwealth argues that the firearm exemption set out in § 10(a)(4) is to be read literally, and thus applies only to persons who have complied with the provisions of both "sections one hundred and twenty-nine C and one hundred and thirty-one G of chapter one hundred and forty" [Note 6] (emphasis added). We do not agree with this contention.
returning residents who possess a firearm, while § 131G refers to nonresidents who carry certain firearms, it would be virtually impossible to ever satisfy the requirements of both sections simultaneously.
The answer to question two is "yes," by satisfying the exception set out in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), new residents and certain returning residents thereby satisfy the firearm exemption set out in G. L. c. 269, § 10(a)(4), for a limited period of time, without also complying with the provisions of G. L. c. 140, § 131G.
Question three: "Whether satisfaction of the firearm identification card exception set out in G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j) is a defense for a violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10(m)?"
Section 10(m) goes on to state that "[t]he possession of a valid firearm identification card issued under section 129B shall not be a defense for a violation of this subsection[.]" GeneralLaws c. 140, § 129C, provides an exemption only from the firearm identification card requirement set forth in G. L. c. 140, § 129B, not the licensing requirements of G. L. c. 140, §§ 131 or 131F. In addition, G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), entitles new residents to own or possess "any firearm, rifle or shotgun and any ammunition therefor." A large capacity feeding device is not among the list of items covered by G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j).
Also, the definition set forth in G. L. c. 140, § 121, for a "large capacity weapon" includes specific language that "[t]he term 'large capacity weapon' shall be a secondary designation and shall apply to a weapon in addition to its primary designation as a firearm, rifle or shotgun" (emphasis added).
The answer to question three is "no," satisfaction of G. L. c. 140, § 129C(j), does not provide a defense to a violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10(m).
Conclusion. For the reasons set forth above, we answer Questions 1 and 3, "No," and Question 2, "Yes."
"If, prior to trial . . . , a question of law arises which the trial judge determines is so important or doubtful as to require the decision of the Appeals Court, the judge may report the case so far as necessary to present the question of law arising therein. If the case is reported prior to trial, the case shall be continued for trial to await the decision of the Appeals Court."
[Note 2] Since the parties, unlike in Commonwealth v. Wood, 398 Mass. 135 (1986), have not stipulated to the defendant's residency, whether he was a new resident is of course a question of fact that remains to be decided in this case.
"(a) Whoever, except as provided or exempted by statute, knowingly has in his possession; or knowingly has under his control in a vehicle; a firearm, loaded or unloaded, as defined in section one hundred and twenty-one of chapter one hundred and forty without either [followed by a list of exemptions] . . . shall be punished . . . ."
The previous version of the subsection required that the firearm be "carrie [d]."
"(4) having complied with the provisions of sections one hundred and twenty-nine C and one hundred and thirty-one G of chapter one hundred and forty . . . ."
"(j) Any new resident moving into the commonwealth, any resident of the commonwealth returning after having been absent from the commonwealth for not less than 180 consecutive days or any resident of the commonwealth upon being released from active service with any of the armed services of the United States with respect to any firearm, rifle or shotgun and any ammunition therefor then in his possession, for 60 days after such release, return or entry into the commonwealth[.]"
"Any person who is not a resident of the commonwealth may carry a pistol or revolver in or through the commonwealth for the purpose of taking part in a pistol or revolver competition or attending any meeting or exhibition of any organized group of firearm collectors or for the purpose of hunting; provided, that such person is a resident of the United States and has a permit or license to carry firearms issued under the laws of any state, district or territory thereof which has licensing requirements which prohibit the issuance of permits or licenses to persons who have been convicted of a felony or who have been convicted of the unlawful use, possession or sale of narcotic or harmful drugs; provided, further, that in the case of a person traveling in or through the commonwealth for the purpose of hunting, he has on his person a hunting or sporting license issued by the commonwealth or by the state of his destination. Police officers and other peace officers of any state, territory or jurisdiction within the United States duly authorized to possess firearms by the laws thereof shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to have a permit or license to carry firearms as described in this section."
[Note 7] The version of G. L. c. 269, § 10(a), that the court considered in 1984 had been previously rewritten by St. 1975, c. 113, § 2.
"(m) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) or (h), any person not exempted by statute who knowingly has in his possession, or knowingly has under his control in a vehicle, a large capacity weapon or large capacity feeding device therefor who does not possess a valid Class A or Class B license to carry firearms issued under section 131 or 131F of chapter 140, except as permitted or otherwise provided under this section or chapter 140, shall be punished by imprisonment in a state prison for not less than two and one-half years nor more than ten years."

References: § 129
 § 10
 § 131
 § 129
 § 10
 § 10
 § 129
 § 10
 § 129
 § 10
 § 10
 § 10
 § 129
 § 10
 § 10
 § 10
 § 129
 § 129
 § 129
 § 10
 § 10
 § 131
 § 129
 § 10
 § 131
 § 129
 § 10
 § 129
 § 129
 § 129
 § 129
 § 121
 § 129
 § 10
 v. 
 § 10
 § 2