Opinion ID: 2814832
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Storage of Guns in Canada

Text: According to the affidavit, 132 of Mr. Adams’ guns were found in a Canadian storage unit. All had been purchased from a Canadian auction house and stored for roughly 10 months. 1. Mr. Adams’ Reasons for Storing the Guns In these circumstances, the government argues that Mr. Adams was planning to smuggle some or all of the 132 guns into the United States. For this argument, the government theorizes that Mr. Adams kept the guns in storage until he found a buyer and when he did, he would smuggle the guns into the United States or ship them directly to the buyer, circumventing U.S. taxes and regulations. 3 The problem with that theory is that there is nothing in the affidavit to tie the storage of Canadian guns to a plan to smuggle them. For example, the affidavit does not provide any evidence that Mr. Adams  was looking for a buyer while he was storing the guns in Canada or  had plans to smuggle the guns or ship them to a buyer. In the absence of any such evidence, the court had no reason to infer an intent to smuggle guns from Mr. Adams’ decision to store his guns in Canada. 2. Mr. Adams’ Omission of 51 Guns on the Form 6A The government points out that Mr. Adams failed to list 51 of the stored guns on an import form (“Form 6A”), though he had listed many of these guns on a request for an import permit (“Form 6”). But this fact does not create an inference of gun smuggling. To bring guns into the United States, an importer must obtain a permit by completing a Form 6. 27 C.F.R. § 478.112(b)(1)-(2)(i) (2012). When the guns are eventually brought into the United States, the importer must submit a Form 6A to obtain the firearms from customs. 27 C.F.R. § 478.112(c)(1) (2012). Thus, Mr. Adams would not have needed to list the guns in the Form 6A until he actually imported them. Id. Mr. Adams included 51 guns on a Form 6 that he had not listed on a corresponding Form 6A. The government suggests that Mr. Adams omitted 4 the firearms on the Form 6A because he was planning to smuggle them. But this suggestion is circular: Unless one begins with the assumption that Mr. Adams is a gun smuggler, his omission of the 51 guns on the Form 6A could not supply evidence that he was involved in gun smuggling. After all, why would Mr. Adams alert U.S. authorities of plans to import guns that he actually planned to smuggle? The government answers with a theory: Mr. Adams needed the Form 6s to buy the guns in Canada. Appellant’s App., vol. IV, at 722; Appellant’s Opening Br. at 26-27 (Dec. 3, 2014); Oral Arg. at 7:37-7:57. But as the government conceded in oral argument, there is nothing in the affidavit suggesting the need for a Form 6 to buy guns in Canada. Oral Arg. 7:32-7:52. Thus, the affidavit does not suggest anything sinister in Mr. Adams’ listing of the guns in the Form 6s and omission of the guns in the Form 6As. 3. Mr. Adams’ Inclusion of 81 Guns on the Form 6A The affidavit also suggests a sinister motive for the 81 guns included on the Form 6A: The review [by a Canadian police officer] determined that all of the weapons listed on [the Form 6A] that [Mr. Adams] had proposed to import into the United States were accounted for in the [Canadian Police Department’s] seizure of weapons on July 27, 2012, that was [sic] illegally stored in a Calgary, Alberta, Canada, storage Locker by [Mr. Adams]. [Mr. Adams] therefore falsified [Form 6A], as he never intended to import the dozens of firearms he secreted into his Canadian Storage locker. 5 Appellant’s App., vol. I, at 73. This inference of “falsification” is legally invalid and illogical. The Form 6A is not submitted until the importer begins the importation process. 27 C.F.R. § 478.112(c)(1) (2012). Thus, if Mr. Adams had inaccurately included the guns on the Form 6A, he would not have falsely represented anything to the government until he began the importation process. The affiant’s theory of “falsification” is not only invalid under the regulations but also illogical. For roughly ten months, Mr. Adams stored the guns, listing some and omitting some. For the guns omitted on the Form 6A, the affiant infers from the omission that Mr. Adams never intended to lawfully import the guns. For the guns included on the Form 6A, the affiant infers from the inclusion that Mr. Adams was falsifying the form because he never intended to lawfully import the guns. The government’s theory illustrates the adage: “Heads I win, tails I win.” 4. Probable Cause to Believe the Evidence Would Be at Mr. Adams’ New Mexico Properties in 2013 But let’s assume that Mr. Adams was planning to smuggle all of the 132 guns from Canada in 2011. The search warrants were not to search the storage unit; they were to search Mr. Adams’ properties in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The court could issue the search warrants only if there was a fair probability that Mr. Adams had guns, records, or other evidence of 6 smuggling in those properties. United States v. Long, 774 F.3d 653, 658 (10th Cir. 2014), cert denied, __ U.S. __, 135 S. Ct. 2068 (2015). Even if Mr. Adams had intended to smuggle the guns from Canada, nothing in the affidavit would have suggested the presence of smuggled guns, records, or other gun-smuggling evidence in Mr. Adams’ New Mexico properties in 2013 (when the warrants were signed). See United States v. Snow, 919 F.2d 1458, 1459-60 (10th Cir. 1990) (“Probable cause to search cannot be based on stale information that no longer suggests that the items sought will be found in the place to be searched.”). 5. Summary In these circumstances, the discovery of Mr. Adams’ guns in his Canadian storage unit would not have contributed to a finding of probable cause for a search of Mr. Adams’ New Mexico properties.