Federal Gun Trafficking Defense: Straw Purchase Charges.

18 U.S.C. § 932 makes it unlawful for anyone to knowingly purchase, or conspire to purchase, any firearm in or otherwise affecting interstate or foreign commerce for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of another person, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the person meets one of the statutory criteria. The law covers: - A recipient whom the purchaser knows, or has reason to know, is prohibited from possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) or § 922(n).

• A recipient whom the purchaser knows or has reason to believe intends to use the firearm in a felony, a Federal crime of terrorism, or a drug trafficking crime.
• Any firearm purchased for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of a person described in 18 U.S.C. § 932(b)(1) or (2), or intended for transfer to such a person. The law that creates federal straw-purchase liability imposes a “knowingly” or “having reasonable cause to believe” standard, and this is among the elements that the prosecutor must prove for each gun trafficking charge. If a person did not know his or her actual recipient was a prohibited possessor or that the firearm would be used in an illegal drug trafficking crime, prosecutors cannot use 18 U.S.C. § 932 to charge them with straw purchase liability. While prosecutors may mischaracterize this federal offense, the statute explicitly limits its reach. For example, “It is against federal law for any person to knowingly purchase a firearm on behalf of any other person, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such other person- meets the criteria of 1 or more paragraphs of section 922(d), intends to use, carry, possess, or sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm in furtherance of a felony, a Federal crime of terrorism, or a drug trafficking crime, or intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm to a person described in paragraph (1) or (2).” the U.S. Department of Justice explains on its website. While misrepresentations can support a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 932, a misrepresentation is not itself an element of that offense; the required issue is the buyer’s knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the purchase was for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of another person meeting the statutory criteria. By misrepresenting the buyer’s purpose or the actual recipient to the gun dealer, the government may argue that the buyer made it clear that he or she knowingly purchased the firearm for someone else, and that the buyer knew the firearm’s intended use would violate federal law.

Which federal charges can accompany a § 932 straw-purchase allegation?

A conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 932 is not automatic and requires proof of the relevant elements, including the buyer’s state of mind. In addition to other federal firearm offenses, a § 932 allegation can often be accompanied by: - 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6), The federal statute that makes it a crime to provide false information to federally licensed firearm dealers;

• 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A), The federal statute that makes it a crime to knowingly and willfully provide false information in federally mandated firearm-related records. For example, when buyers purchase firearms from licensed dealers, they fill out ATF Form 4473, which asks “Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form?” and other questions, including a certifying statement that the information is true and a declaration that the individual is not a “prohibited possessor”; and,
• 18 U.S.C. § 933, another federal gun-trafficking offense that makes it unlawful to ship, transport, transfer, cause to be transported, or otherwise dispose of a firearm to another person in or otherwise affecting interstate or foreign commerce when the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the recipient’s use, carrying, or possession of the firearm would constitute a felony, or to receive such a firearm when the recipient knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the receipt would constitute a felony. While Section 932 applies to purchases made for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of another person who meets the criteria in 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), intends to use the firearm in furtherance of a felony, Federal crime of terrorism, or drug-trafficking crime, or intends to transfer it to such a person, Section 933 applies to specified firearm transfers or receipts when its statutory knowledge requirements are met. Many of these federal gun trafficking laws overlap and have the same essential requirements. Prosecutors often use them interchangeably, and often together, trying to “cover their bases” in order to convict defendants based on the evidence at hand. Our gun trafficking defense lawyers and consultants are highly familiar with the specific elements of these federal offenses and can guide you through the criminal process toward a favorable resolution based on the facts at hand.

How Might Purchase Patterns Prove, or Fail to Prove, the Required Knowledge to Hold Someone Liable for a Federal Straw-Purchase Offense?

Is there a number of firearm purchases that automatically proves a defendant is engaged in illegal straw purchases? No. Is there a number of firearm purchases that automatically proves a defendant is engaged in any other federal gun trafficking offense, including dealing firearms without a license? No. And is there any other fixed standard for any of the federal gun trafficking violations that would apply to your specific situation? No. Instead, federal investigators use their best efforts and all available evidence to argue that the facts and circumstances are “indicative” of illegal activity. In practice, this means that ATF agents and other federal law enforcement personnel examine your firearm purchase records, looking for certain types of “patterns” and using other evidence as appropriate. Here are some examples: - They investigate not just the frequency of your firearm purchases, but how similar the firearms you purchased were.

• They look at how soon you sold or otherwise transferred the firearms you purchased.
• They look at the “sales price” you received, whether you appear to have made a profit on the transactions, and the communications (if any) that you had with potential buyers.
• They use the information provided by licensed firearm dealers, whom are required to report multiple handgun sales (i.e., transactions involving two or more handguns) occurring within five consecutive business days.
• They use the ATF’s National Tracing Center, where they trace recovered guns back to their original purchasers (such as through transfers made to your state’s residents).
• They look at retail-level surveillance video, bank records, financial and location data (i.e., cell phone data), shipping or transportation records, and telephone wiretaps; and,
• They talk to cooperating witnesses (or simply “criminals talking to criminals”). Importantly, cooperating witnesses often have an incentive to deflect blame or exaggerate their knowledge of the defendant’s intent in exchange for favorable treatment. In each case, the government is attempting to connect the factual record with the “knowingly” (or “has reason to believe”) standard that underpins each of the federal gun trafficking violations. While evidence of any of these facts and circumstances may seem damning, we are experienced in analyzing this type of evidence to understand why it falls short of meeting the federal government’s burden. If you are facing firearm charges, we encourage you to reach out to our team to schedule a free, confidential consultation.

When Can Your Attorney Challenge the Evidence Against You Before a Plea or Trial in a Federal Gun Trafficking Case?

In order to secure a conviction against a defendant at trial, prosecutors must prove all of the elements of the charged statutory offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If prosecutors believe they can prove their case, and if there is a reason to do so, they may decide to proceed to trial without first attempting to negotiate a plea deal. They may think their evidence is strong, or they may think your potential defenses are weak, but prosecutors can make mistakes. There may be multiple defense strategies available; however, not all defenses have the potential to be pursued. For example, evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment may support suppressing firearms, messages, location data, or other evidence obtained during a criminal investigation. If the evidence is suppressed or otherwise unavailable, it may be insufficient to support a conviction at trial; a plea hearing does not itself determine the admissibility of every item of evidence. If this is the case, you may have a more potent defense strategy to pursue. Your attorney can also use the Fifth Amendment to challenge the admissibility of a defendant’s statement that was obtained through unconstitutional interrogation.

Your attorney can also review relevant records and interview witnesses before prosecutors decide to offer you a plea bargain or file a formal criminal complaint with the United States District Court. It is always important to seek a thorough, independent review of the evidence in your case, and when possible, it is advisable to begin investigating before prosecutors decide to move toward criminal charges. For example, your defense attorney may:

• Work to determine whether any search warrants, traffic stops, consent searches, digital-device seizures, or other law enforcement investigative tactics were unconstitutional; and,
• Work to determine whether a set of firearm transactions that were previously deemed to be illustrative of commercial dealing is instead indicative of personal activity. In each case, your attorney will be able to get a clear picture of what is at stake. Our law firm handles federal gun trafficking allegations and charges. Regardless of what you’re facing, we have experience handling cases involving everything from firearm-related evidence to electronic evidence.

Speak With Counsel Before You Answer Anything

If agents have contacted you, the order matters: counsel first, answers second. Spodek Law Group has been practicing since 1976 and defends federal matters nationwide, coast to coast, from offices in New York, Brooklyn, Queens and Los Angeles. Call 888 348 8028.