You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Appeals court tosses defaced gun law
- Thread starter MoW
- Start date
One the one hand I can argue that I think the appeals court erred. The law merely states that anyone in posession of a weapon with an altered or obliterated serial # is presumed to be the one who altered the #. The presumption is rebuttable by the accused during his trial. How this refutes the presumption of innocence is unclear since the presumption of wrongdoing is rebuttable and the accused has his day in court. The presumption is merely the tool which allows the DA to charge the party with the altered gun.
OTOH, I can also argue that the court was correct in it's ruling. The law expressly states that posession of a weapon with an altered/obliterated serial number is prima facia evidence of guilt on the part of the posessor of the weapon. That sort of does away with the whole concept of a trial to determine guilt if the law states that one is guilty because the law says so.
Thus, I guess the newsreporter wasn't so clear in his reporting of the appeals court decision if both sides of the argument can be logically argued.
OTOH, I can also argue that the court was correct in it's ruling. The law expressly states that posession of a weapon with an altered/obliterated serial number is prima facia evidence of guilt on the part of the posessor of the weapon. That sort of does away with the whole concept of a trial to determine guilt if the law states that one is guilty because the law says so.
Thus, I guess the newsreporter wasn't so clear in his reporting of the appeals court decision if both sides of the argument can be logically argued.
Interesting. A lot of knife laws presume that a knife is a weapon if it's over a certain length, or if it has certain features. This case could be useful if you're charged with carrying an illegal knife in IL (technically only switchblades, but there's dispute over the wording of the law).Hunter said after a recent Illinois Supreme Court ruling, all cases involving "presumptions" are being given a second look, though Quinones' is the first case to be overturned as a result of that.
Langenator
New member
The presumption may have been rebuttable, but that would have required the defendant to prove a negative-that he didn't alter the SN. And unless you can produce someone willing to incriminate themselves by admitting that they altered the SN.
This ruling rightly places the burden on the state to prove that the defendant committed the crime. For once a court decision from Illinois that makes sense.
This ruling rightly places the burden on the state to prove that the defendant committed the crime. For once a court decision from Illinois that makes sense.