Source: http://www.pagunlaws.com/Restore_Gun_Rights.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 18:45:37+00:00

Document:
Read the material below to learn more.
Some people may believe that only people who have been convicted of serious felonies or serious violent crimes are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms. That is far from the actual situation.
There are people, probably many people, who were convicted in the past of relatively minor nonviolent crimes, such as the theft of items worth only several dollars, one DUI not even involving high levels of blood alcohol, accidents or injuries, and people who were the subjects of involuntary civil commitments who became prohibited persons.
Under the former Pennsylvania Penal Code or the former Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, some crimes that would now be graded as misdemeanors were felonies.
Convictions for other minor nonviolent misdemeanor crimes sometimes carried with them possible sentences of incarceration for a period of over two years. Very often the defendants were encouraged to “get it over with and go home” in return for being sentenced only to pay a small fine without any jail time. Such old convictions now sometimes cause the person to be a prohibited person under federal law and therefore Pennsylvania law.
(1) In 1962, Michael S. Lehman was convicted of larceny for stealing a case of beer worth $3.38. At the time, larceny was a felony under § 807 of the 1939 Penal Code, subject to a $2,000 fine and five years imprisonment. Michael Lehman was placed on probation and assessed the costs of prosecution. Thirty-eight years later, during an attempt to buy a .22 rifle, a Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) background check, see 18 Pa. C.S. § 6111, revealed the 1962 conviction; his purchase was denied. Lehman v. Pennsylvania State Police, 839 A. 2d 265 - Pa: Supreme Court 2003.
(2) In June 25, 1958, Arthur J. Moats pled guilty and was convicted of larceny pursuant to Section 4807 of the Crimes Code, now repealed, for stealing six dollars worth of gasoline. Arthur J. Moats was sentenced to three years probation. On April 6, 1999, Arthur J. Moats filed an application to renew his license to carry a firearm with the Fayette County Sheriff's Office. Pursuant to Section 6109(d) of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act of 1995(Act), 18 Pa.C.S. § 6109(d), the Sheriff investigated Petitioner's criminal history record. The Sheriff then denied Petitioner's application because of a 1958 larceny conviction, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. Moats v. P. S. P., 782 A. 2d 1102 - Pa: Commonwealth Court 2001.
(3) A veteran of the armed forces of the United States who served honorably in combat having been deployed to Iraq twice where he participated in Operation Enduring Freedom (July 2002 - December 2002) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (January 2003 - June 2003) was denied the purchase a hunting rifle in Pennsylvania as a result of an background check by the Pennsylvania State Police (a PICS check) in 2009. While he was a juvenile he had problems involving truancy, underage drinking and criminal mischief. In 1998, then seventeen (17) years of age, after it had been suggested to his mother that “it might straighten him out” if he were involuntarily committed, he was admitted to a general hospital for examination and treatment under a section 302 involuntary mental health commitment. He thus became a prohibited person under both Pennsylvania and federal law due to the involuntary commitment.
(4) In February 7, 2009, an individual attempted to obtain the transfer of ownership of his brother’s handgun to himself at the place of business of a federal firearms licensee. The transfer of the firearm was denied as a result of the background check that disclosed that the brother who was to receive the handgun had been convicted of three violations of 75 Pa.C.S. § 3731, Driving Under The Influence Of Alcohol (75 Pa.C.S. § 3731 (DUI)) between 1995 and 1998. None of the offenses involved high levels of blood alcohol, accidents or injuries, or refusal to submit to testing. Section 6105(c)(3) of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(c)(3)) provides, inter alia, that a person who has been convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol as provided in 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802 or former 75 Pa.C.S. § 3731 on three or more separate occasions within a five–year period is subject to the prohibition stated under 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(a) regarding “Persons not possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms.” The conviction on September 11, 1998, of the violation of 75 § 3731(a)(1) also resulted in a federal firearms disability due to its being Petitioner’s third violation of the prior Vehicle Code Section 3731 and thus classified as a misdemeanor of the first degree by 75 Pa.C.S. § 3731(e)(1)).
Sections 6105 and 6105.1 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105 and 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105.1) contain provisions for the restoration of firearms rights for persons convicted of certain offenses under certain circumstances.
Section § 6111.1 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act provides that a person who is involuntarily committed pursuant to section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act may petition the court to review the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the commitment was based; and, if the court determines that the evidence upon which the involuntary commitment was based was insufficient, the court shall order that the record of the commitment submitted to the Pennsylvania State Police be expunged.
(18 Pa. C.S. § 9122(b) provides that a criminal history record information may be expunged when: an individual who is the subject of the information reaches 70 years of age and has been free of arrest or prosecution for ten years following final release from confinement or supervision. Thus that provision of CHRIA would in effect act to restore firearms rights.
18 Pa.C.S. § 6105. Persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms.
As used in this Section 6105, the term "firearm" shall include any weapons which are designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive or the frame or receiver of any such weapon. (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(i)). Thus, the section 6105 definition includes all firearms, not only handguns, but also those that are commonly referred to as long guns, i.e. rifles and shotguns.
Thus, under the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act a person can become a prohibited person by being convicted of any one of the thirty-eight (38) enumerated offenses (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(b)), or by being convicted of any offense equivalent to any of the above-enumerated offenses under the prior laws of this Commonwealth or any offense equivalent to any of the above-enumerated offenses under the statutes of any other state or of the United States, or, although not having been convicted of an enumerated offense, by being a person whose conduct meets the criteria found under subsection (c) of section 6105.
If convicted of certain of the enumerated offenses, a person could become a prohibited person pursuant to Pennsylvania law, but not necessarily under federal law depending upon Pennsylvania’s grading of the crime and possible period of incarceration.
What is an offense equivalent to any of the above-enumerated offenses?
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has stated, “an equivalent offense is that which is substantially identical in nature and definition to the out-of-state offense when compared to the Pennsylvania offense.” Commonwealth v. Shaw, 744 A.2d 739, at 304, 744 A.2d at 742 (Pa. 2000) (quoting Commonwealth v. Bolden, 532 A.2d 1172, 1175-76 (Pa. Super. 1987)).
In Commonwealth v. Robertson, Jr., 722 A.2d 1047 (Pa. 1999), a plurality of this Court adopted the Superior Court’s approach to determining whether or not an out-of-state offense is “equivalent” to an in-state offense for purposes of determining whether a defendant was properly sentenced as a recidivist offender under the Pennsylvania DUI statute. In determining whether an in-state offense and an out-of-state offense are “equivalents”, the Superior Court has compared the elements of the crimes, the conduct prohibited by the offenses, and the underlying public policy behind the two criminal statutes. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Bolden, 367 Pa.Super. 333, 532 A.2d 1172 (1987).
[A] sentencing court [must] carefully review the elements of the foreign offense in terms of classification of the conduct proscribed, its definition of the offense, and the requirements for culpability. Accordingly, the court may want to discern whether the crime is malum in se or malum prohibitum, or whether the crime is inchoate or specific. If it is a specific crime, the court may look to the subject matter sought to be protected by the statute, e.g., protection of the person or protection of the property. It will also be necessary to examine the definition of the conduct or activity proscribed. In doing so, the court should identify the requisite elements of the crime--the actus reus and mens rea--which form the basis of liability.
Having identified these elements of the foreign offense, the court should next turn its attention to the Pennsylvania Crimes Code for the purpose of determining the equivalent Pennsylvania offense. An equivalent offense is that which is substantially identical in nature and definition [to] the out-of state or federal offense when compared [to the] Pennsylvania offense.” Id., 367 Pa.Super. at 338-39, 532 A.2d at 1175-76.
Shaw, 744 A.2d at 743 (quoting Commonwealth v. Bolden, 532 A.2d 1172, 1175-76 (Pa.
The category “Other persons” includes persons who might normally be expected to be prohibited persons, such as fugitives from justice; those convicted of drug crimes that may be punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding two years; an alien who is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; a person who is the subject of an active protection from abuse order providing for the relinquishment of firearms during the period of time the order is in effect.
(4) A person who has been adjudicated as an incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care and treatment under section 302, 303 or 304 of the provisions of the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L. 817, No. 143), [FN2] known as the Mental Health Procedures Act. This paragraph shall not apply to any proceeding under section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act unless the examining physician has issued a certification that inpatient care was necessary or that the person was committable.
(6) A person who is the subject of an active protection from abuse order issued pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108, which order provided for the relinquishment of firearms during the period of time the order is in effect. This prohibition shall terminate upon the expiration or vacation of an active protection from abuse order or portion thereof relating to the relinquishment of firearms.
Note: If a state crime is not classified as a “misdemeanor” by state law, the exception of 18 U.S.C. § 921(20)(B) does not apply and if the crime is punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, then it is a prohibiting offense under federal law.
(1) If a person convicted of an offense under subsection (a),(b) or (c) (1), (2), (5), (7) or (9) makes application to the court, a hearing shall be held in open court to determine whether the requirements of this section have been met. The commissioner and the district attorney of the county where the application is filed and any victim or survivor of a victim of the offense upon which the disability is based may be parties to the proceeding.
5. Regarding Expungement Of Mental Health Commitments Under Section 6105(f).
As part of an action for expungement pursuant to Section § 6105(f) a practitioner must not overlook the relief provided in 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6111.1.
commitment was based was insufficient, the court shall order that the record of the commitment submitted to the Pennsylvania State Police be expunged. A petition filed under this subsection shall toll the 60-day period set forth under section 6105(a)(2).
examination under section 302(b) of the Mental Health Procedures Act to the Pennsylvania State Police.
We, in Commonwealth ex rel. Magaziner v. Magaziner, 434 Pa. 1, 253 A.2d 263 (1975), approved of the concept of protecting the reputation of a person who was unlawfully thrust into the criminal process by sanctioning the expungement of his criminal record. We should not do less for appellant. The continued existence of the hospital records pose a threat to appellant's reputation. Additionally, the Commonwealth Court's contention that Section 4602(a) prohibits the destruction of appellant's hospital records is erroneous. This section states that records must be kept on persons who are "admitted or committed to any facility . . . under any provision of this act". Since it has been adjudicated that appellant's November 21, 1973 commitment is null and void, appellant was never "admitted or committed to any facility . . . under any provision of this act". Therefore, Section 4602(a) does not bar the destruction of the hospital records in question.
Pennsylvania by statute provides that certain persons are prohibited from possessing, using, manufacturing, controlling, selling or transferring firearms (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105), Pennsylvania statutes also provided that for some persons and under certain limited specific circumstances, firearms rights may be restored or relief granted to persons previously prohibited from possessing firearms (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105; 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105.1; 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6111.1(g); 18 Pa. C.S. § 9122(b)).
Section 6105 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105) contains provisions that cause persons to become prohibited persons due convictions of certain Pennsylvania offenses, convictions of similar criminal offenses of other jurisdictions, due to provisions of federal law (18 U.S.C. § Sec. 922(g)), and other persons who may not have been convicted of any crime at all. As used in Section 6105, the term "firearm" includes all firearms (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(i)). Thus, the section 6105 definition includes not only handguns, but also those firearms that are commonly referred to as long guns, i.e. rifles (with barrels over 16 inches in length) and shotguns (with barrels over 18 inches in length).
Section 6105 also contains provisions for the relief from some of the Pennsylvania firearms disabilities imposed by Section 6105.
Section 6105.1 of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act (18 Pa.C.S. § 6105.1) contains provisions for the restoration of firearms rights to certain persons who had been convicted of a “disabling offense” as defined in Section 6105.1 such as convictions for an offense under a prior Pennsylvania law that resulted in a federal firearms disability. The offense under prior Pennsylvania law must be substantially similar to either an offense currently graded as a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment for not more than two years or conduct which no longer constitutes a violation of law.
Another Pennsylvania statute, the Pennsylvania Criminal History Record Information Act (CHRIA) (18 Pa. C.S. § 9122(b) provides that a criminal history record information may be expunged when: an individual who is the subject of the information reaches 70 years of age and has been free of arrest or prosecution for ten years following final release from confinement or supervision. Thus that provision of CHRIA would in effect act to restore firearms rights.

References: § 807
 § 6111
 v. 
 § 6109
 v. 
 § 3731
 § 3731
 § 6105
 § 3802
 § 3731
 § 6105
 § 3731
 § 3731
 § 6105
 § 6105
 § 6111
 § 9122
 § 6105
 § 6105
 § 6105
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 6108
 § 921
 § 6105
 § 6111
 v. 
 § 6105
 § 6105
 § 6105
 § 6111
 § 9122
 § 6105
 § 6105
 § 6105
 § 9122