Opinion ID: 521073
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Aiding and Abetting the Possession of Illegal Weapons

Text: 13 Count 7 charged defendant with aiding and abetting David Lawson in knowingly receiving and possessing illegal machine guns in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2 and 26 U.S.C. Sec. 5861(c). Section 5861(c) makes it unlawful for any person to receive or possess a firearm made in violation of the provisions of this chapter.... This court has interpreted Sec. 5861(c) as a strict liability offense; thus, for a principal to be liable under Sec. 5861(c), he need only possess the firearm. United States v. Decker, 292 F.2d 89, 90 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 365 U.S. 834, 82 S.Ct. 58, 7 L.Ed.2d 36 (1961). 14 Clearly, defendant's placing of an order and paying for illegal weapons was an act which contributed to David Lawson's possession of the weapons. As to defendant's intent, we find abundant evidence to support the jury's determination that defendant acted with the requisite intent to be found guilty of aiding and abetting in this possession. In his brief, defendant admits that he was aiding and abetting ... the illegal possession of unregistered Uzis. (Brief at 9.) Because the guns were actually CAR-15s and not Uzis and because he had never met or had any discussions with David Lawson, defendant argues that there was no evidence that he could have intended that David Lawson possess illegal firearms. However, no direct evidence of actual communication between the aider and abetter and the principal need be introduced. United States v. Bradley, 421 F.2d 924, 927 (6th Cir.1970). Defendant's intent may be inferred from the fact that he knew that his possession of the unregistered guns would be illegal, and thus anyone trying to procure the weapons for him would also be committing such an offense. Id. Defendant participated in the criminal venture by placing an order for the illegal machine guns and by making advance payment to Owen Sams for their purchase. Such actions definitively demonstrate participation and a desire to bring about the illegal possession of machine guns. Accordingly, we find defendant's arguments with regard to Count 7 to be without merit. 15