Court Opinion

ID: 9494835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:48:13.094178+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:56:39.311326
License: Public Domain

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
While I agree with the panel’s conclusion that current caselaw requires this statute to be construed as a strict liability offense, I note that Dr. Morgan did not base his defense on the meaning of “possession” under § 703. That is, he did not argue, and this opinion does not reach, whether the “possession” of migratory birds prohibited by § 703 must be more than merely constructive, incidental, or transitory. Otherwise, affixing strict liability for violating this statute could easily lead to absurd consequences, such as the criminal conviction of a hunter who was simply carrying the ducks of a disabled friend. The law should not be construed to invite absurdities.