Opinion ID: 1494139
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Introduction of the Shotgun

Text: On appeal, Johnson argues that the shotgun was not relevant to the charge against him and should not have been admitted. On the surface, this argument makes little sense. A shotgun is a firearm within the meaning of KRS 527.040.  Firearm means any weapon which will expel a projectile by the action of an explosive. KRS 527.010(4). Thus, the shotgun, which was found in Walters' home where Johnson resided, was direct proof of a violation of KRS 527.040. Nonetheless, the trial court ruled otherwise. Before the officer who found the shotgun could so testify, the defense counsel stated, Note my continuing objection your honorto the shotgun. To this statement, the trial court replied, I stated that it (introduction of the shotgun) was for a limited purpose .... I can state ... for the record that the statute has to do with the handguns and not the [shotgun]. This ruling most certainly was based on KRS 527.040(4), which provides that [t]he provisions of this section with respect to handguns shall apply only to persons convicted after January 1, 1975, and with respect to other firearms, to persons convicted after July 15, 1994. We base our conclusion on the fact that the record reveals that Johnson was convicted on November 3, 1993, of the prior felony upon which the firearm possession conviction was based. Thus, in this case, the shotgun could not be used as direct evidence of guilt. But certainly it was relevant to the issue of whether Johnson had possession of the three handguns, i.e., constructive possession of the shotgun, which was found in plain view inside Walters' home, made it more likely that Johnson had possession of the three handguns, which were found in concealed locations. KRE 401.