HON. DAVID S. RITTER District Attorney of Orange County
This is in reply to your letter dated July 26, 1977, wherein you ask for an opinion with respect to an interpretation of section
A prior opinion of the Attorney General, issued on July 10, 1973, concluded that violators would forfeit such firearms unlawfully possessed (section 400.05[1]), but that such weapons must be destroyed or rendered ineffective and harmless pursuant to section
It is noted that section
There is no similar provision in the law whereby a District Attorney may retain such firearms for his own use or the use of members of his investigative staff.
A district Attorney may not retain any confiscated or seized evidence or contraband unless specifically so authorized (Penal Law, §
The position of the Orange County District Attorney as manifested in his certificate of non-destruction is genuine and commendable in attempting to present the merits and inequities of this situation, especially his concern to alleviate the fiscal burden of the taxpayers. However, his recommendation to allow such procedure should be presented to the Legislature for the enactment of an appropriate statute.
In the absence of statutory provision granting the District Attorney express authority to retain such firearms for the use of members of his investigative staff, such weapons must be returned to the proper official for disposition (Penal Law, §
