Commonwealth v. Jones
83 Mass. App. Ct. 296 (2013)
Wilbert
Jones was convicted of carrying a firearm without a license, possession of a
firearm without a firearm identification (FID) card, and drinking alcohol in
public. The defendant appealed the
firearm convictions arguing that the patfrisk search lacked justification and
that the convictions violated his right to keep and bear arms. State police troopers observed the defendant drinking alcohol in public and
asked him if he had any harmful objects. When the defendant answered in the
affirmative, a Trooper proceeded with the patfrisk and found a handgun, for
which the defendant admitted he had no license.
The Appeals Court of Massachusetts found that the affirmative answer
regarding harmful objects created an objective basis for the patfrisk in
accordance with the objective reasonableness test for authorization of a
seizure or search by police. The
critical distinction between this case and the Gomes case which defense cited was the interrogation of the suspect
by the police and the subsequent affirmative answer. The history of violence in
the area the patfrisk took place and the intoxication of the defendant further
reinforced the objective basis. Furthermore, the defendant did not have
standing to challenge the constitutionality of the requirement that a person
must obtain an FID card to carry a firearm because he did not apply for an FID
card and subsequently get denied the license.
The judgments of the trial court were affirmed.
Written 7/7/13
