Com. v. Moses, S.
185 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 17, 2016Background
- On March 2, 2012, Shawn Moses (a Pennsylvania resident) was arrested in Philadelphia while carrying a loaded 9mm Glock concealed under his clothing; FIU testing showed the gun was operable with ten rounds.
- Moses admitted he purchased the firearm in Georgia and had no Pennsylvania license; he also admitted he did not hold a Georgia carry license.
- He testified he believed the gun was legal (purchased lawfully in Georgia) and that he thought a permit was unnecessary, and said the gun had been used as a prop and would be stored in a safe.
- A stipulation admitted the FIU report and a Pennsylvania certificate of non-licensure into evidence.
- A jury convicted Moses of 18 Pa.C.S. § 6106(a)(1) (carrying a firearm without a license, felony) and 18 Pa.C.S. § 6108 (carrying a firearm on public streets in Philadelphia, misdemeanor); sentence: 3–6 years imprisonment plus probation.
- On appeal Moses challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, asserting a claimed belief that he did not need a Pennsylvania license because of Georgia law/reciprocity.
Issues
| Issue | Moses's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for convictions under §6106 and §6108 | Moses argued his testimony showed he believed the gun was legal and he did not need a PA license (mistake excusing culpability) | Commonwealth pointed to operable, loaded, concealed firearm on Moses’s person in Philadelphia and his admission of no PA or GA license; jury entitled to disbelieve Moses’s testimony | Affirmed: evidence sufficient to prove elements beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Whether Moses’s belief that he didn’t need a PA license negates mens rea | Moses asserted a mistake negating criminal intent | Commonwealth argued the belief was a mistake of law (not a defense) and jury could reject his testimony | Held: belief was mistake of law, not a defense; mens rea satisfied under §302 (recklessness/knowledge) |
| Applicability of interstate reciprocity or §6106(b)(15) exception | Moses relied on Georgia law/reciprocity with PA to claim exemption | Commonwealth noted Moses had no Georgia permit; statutory reciprocity applies only to valid out-of-state permit holders and §6106(b)(15) requires a valid out-of-state permit | Held: reciprocity and §6106(b)(15) inapplicable because Moses lacked any valid out-of-state license |
| Whether a PA resident may rely on another state’s permit | Moses argued reciprocity rendered his conduct lawful | Commonwealth and precedent: Pennsylvania resident without a PA license cannot rely on another state’s permit even if reciprocity exists | Held: PA resident without PA license may not carry under another state’s permit; conviction stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Lopez, 57 A.3d 74 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standard for sufficiency review)
- Commonwealth v. Lopez, 565 A.2d 437 (Pa. 1989) (elements of §6106 explained)
- Commonwealth v. Sinnott, 30 A.3d 1105 (Pa. 2011) (courts may disregard self-serving testimony in sufficiency review)
- Commonwealth v. Hogan, 468 A.2d 493 (Pa. Super. 1983) (recklessness may be shown circumstantially)
- Commonwealth v. McKown, 79 A.3d 678 (Pa. Super. 2013) (Pennsylvania resident may not rely on another state's permit to carry in PA)
- Commonwealth v. Henderson, 938 A.2d 1063 (Pa. Super. 2007) (ignorance of law is not a defense)