A Victory in the Court of Special Appeals

Back in late 2008, I represented a client who was charged with 1st-degree assault (carrying up to 25 years in prison), use of a handgun in the commission of a crime of violence, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.  In a nutshell, my client had gotten into a quarrel with his wife's former husband; at this point, the version of the event differs, with the State claiming my client discharged a firearm at the former husband, while my client contended my merely brandished a starter's pistol. 

Before the trial started, I argued to the judge that while a starter's pistol can be a firearm, if it is capable of expelling a projectile, or is capable of being converted to expell a projectile, the starter's pistol in this case did not qualify as a firearm because, even according to the State's own expert, it was incapable of discharging a projectile nor was it capable of being converted to do so.  The judge overruled my position, and let the State argue to the jury that my client could be guilty of using and possessing a firearm, even if he had used a starter's pistol.  I argued self-defense at trial, and the jury actually acquitted my client of 1st-degree assault, and use of a firearm, but, probably because they were told a starter's pistol was automatically a firearm, convicted him simply of possessing a firearm.  (In other words, the jury apparently believed that my client's use of the weapon was justified, thus resulting in an acquittal for using a firearm, but concluded nonetheless that his simply having the weapon in the first place constituted the crime of possession).

The case went up on appeal, and just today I learned that, in a reported opinion, the Court of Special Appeals agreed with my position, and reversed the conviction for possession of a firearm.

Web Resources

FindLaw
Thomson West
U.S. Courts
Westlaw
United States Chamber of Commerce
FirstGov
Library of Congress
White House
Internal Revenue Service
Yahoo!Legal Blog Directory