Juvenile record of stolen firearm sealed or petition to reinstate right to own a firearm

[James Demore]

Jurisdiction

Washington

I was "adjudicated" as a juvenile for a b & e and stole a gun. To get a certain job I need to be able to own a firearm (even though the job obviously doesn't require one). I have two options, have the juvenile records sealed or petition to possess a firearm reinstated. There's a TON of hoops to jump through to reinstate rights. If I got the records sealed would that work or would I still need to petition to reinstate to possess a firearm? Washington state

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

That depends odds are if you have your records sealed any firearms purchase check is going to see right through it.

 

[army judge]

If someone tells you a court record is SEALED, the person won't tell you that some people, companies, entities possess Superman's X-RAY vision, are able to leap tall buildings with a bound, can outrun a locomotive, stop speeding bullets with their hand, and are able to see ANYTHING, even when SEALED by courts of record.

 

[mightymoose]

Hmm... I wouldn't expect a juvenile offense would result in this.

 

[flyingron]

Hmm... I wouldn't expect a juvenile offense would result in this.

You'd be wrong. Juvenile convictions very much bar you.

Gun rights after a juvenile adjudication of this sort can be restored either by the petitioning process (same as adults) or by just having the juvenile records sealed. Neither is automatic. The latter is a lot easier.

In the poster's case, sealing may be the only option. He said B&E, but that's not an actual crime name in the code. It likely is one of the BURGLARY statutes and first-degree burglary is a class A felony. You can't petition for gun right restoration if you have either a class A felony or a sex offense.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I'm a little confused by...

To get a certain job I need to be able to own a firearm (even though the job obviously doesn't require one).

 

[army judge]

Some states have "legalized" marijuana usage, contrary to federal law.

Some states have attempted to "restore" the right to own a firearm after being convicted of certain crimes (or barred from firearm ownership because of certain other actions), contrary to federal firearm statutes and regulations.


A presidential pardon is the ONLY thing that can restore ALL of a person's rights.

A sitting president can exercise clemency powers at any time, whether a felon seeks such restoration or not.

A gubernatorial pardon from a state governor might apply in THAT state, but doesn't restore any federal rights revocation in place.

This explains the existing federal firearm rights restorations BAN by Congressional action for the past 27 years:

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0617.htm

 

[Highwayman]

I'm a little confused by...

Yes, and how is that "obvious" to us?

 

[flyingron]

Sorry, ArmyJudge, but I disagree. The federal policy with regard to the 18 USC 922(g) prohibitions is that if the state in who convicted him vacates, seals, or otherwise restores his civil rights with regard to the conviction, that also clears him at the federal level.

In Washington state, there are two ways after felony to restore rights. You can petition the courts there to reinstate the rights. As I pointed out, this may or may not be an option for him based on the exact conviction he has. It's also going to take a court appearance (best by an attorney), takes time, and is not a guaranteed positive outcome.

On the other hand, sealing of juvenile criminal records, while not automatic in that state like many others, is straight-forward and will restore his gun rights.

 

[army judge]

Sorry, ArmyJudge, but I disagree. The federal policy with regard to the 18 USC 922(g) prohibitions is that if the state in who convicted him vacates, seals, or otherwise restores his civil rights with regard to the conviction, that also clears him at the federal level.

In Washington state, there are two ways after felony to restore rights. You can petition the courts there to reinstate the rights. As I pointed out, this may or may not be an option for him based on the exact conviction he has. It's also going to take a court appearance (best by an attorney), takes time, and is not a guaranteed positive outcome.

On the other hand, sealing of juvenile criminal records, while not automatic in that state like many others, is straight-forward and will restore his gun rights.

I have no problem if you disagree with anything I type.

I'm not one of the nine sitting on SCOTUS, whose opinions matter.

Anything I say or type means nothing to anyone but silly, old me.

That said, many people cheat the Federal background check for firearms purchases.

As the federal DNA repository grows, their fingerprint repository manages to nab a couple dozen cheaters monthly.

I advise clients who happen to have a firearms handicap to talk to another attorney, as that is a rabbit warren I avoid.

 

[flyingron]

It's not "cheating" anything. It's expressly in the statute. 18 USC 921 defines the disabling offense as:

(20) The term "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" does not include--​

(A) any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or

(B) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

What constitutes a conviction of such a crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held. Any conviction which has been expunged, or set aside or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored shall not be considered a conviction for purposes of this chapter, unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.​

Read that last part that a placed in bold. If the state relieves him from the disability as specified, it works for the feds as well.

Please stop inserting your political beliefs as if they were the law.

 

[army judge]

It's not "cheating" anything. It's expressly in the statute. 18 USC 921 defines the disabling offense as:

(20) The term "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" does not include--​

(A) any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or

(B) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

What constitutes a conviction of such a crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held. Any conviction which has been expunged, or set aside or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored shall not be considered a conviction for purposes of this chapter, unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.​

Read that last part that a placed in bold. If the state relieves him from the disability as specified, it works for the feds as well.

Please stop inserting your political beliefs as if they were the law.

Sure, whatever you say.

 

[James Demore]

I'm a little confused by...

The job requires the right to own a firearm, but the job does not require one to carry a firearm. Given the kind of job it makes sense to have one, but it isn't necessary to do the job properly.

 

[James Demore]

Yes, and how is that "obvious" to us?

I suppose I should have said. "It's obvious to ME that the job doesn't require one."