Friend's father forgot to reg hangun moving to CA

[tabascoz28]

I talked to one gun store, he sounded like this was the only answer, CA law says you need to reg in 30 days. He moved here 6 years ago due to age and having his daughter take care if him. Forgot, what can he do? Go back to Nevada and sell there?

[M1NM]

Gift it to daughter have her register it. Of course if he went ahead and registered it probably nothing would happen since their only goal is finding out who/where guns are for the future.....
PS he's no longer a NV resident how does selling it there any different than in CA - they also have a PPT law that is worse than the CA one?

[edgerly779]

He can sell here no problem. He does not have to prove he owns them. Same question on here many times. Do not tell ffl anything about ownership. Or how they got here.

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by tabascoz28

I talked to one gun store, he sounded like this was the only answer, CA law says you need to reg in 30 days (60 days. The law says 60 days. Please refer to PC section 27560). He moved here 6 years ago due to age and having his daughter take care if him. Forgot, what can he do? Go back to Nevada and sell there?

Not a big deal. Fill out the "New Resident" report form, pay the $19.00 and sin no more.

Don't worry about the making a slightly tardy report. The statute contains a "No Fang" provision that prevents him from being prosecuted if DOJ only learns of the violation through the late report.

He can keep the gun assuming that he's not prohibited.

[Mayor McRifle]

Originally Posted by edgerly779

He can sell here no problem. He does not have to prove he owns them. Same question on here many times. Do not tell ffl anything about ownership. Or how they got here.

Exactly. They just want to know that the gun has never been reported stolen. Other than that, they’re happy for the opportunity to have the gun registered in the buyer’s name during the sale.

[tabascoz28]

Thank you all, I will suggest this to them after talking to a few more stores. This way we can all play with it at the range legally.

[NATO762]

What?s the statute of limitations on volreg, 7 years?

[Quiet]

Originally Posted by NATO762

What's the statute of limitations on volreg, 7 years?

None.
There is no legal requirement to submit a "volreg" (Firearm Ownership Report).

The Firearm Ownership Report aka "volreg" is used by a CA resident to voluntarily register legally owned CA legal unregistered firearms (long guns acquired/owned before 2014 and handguns acquired via private party transfer before 1991).

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by NATO762

What?s the statute of limitations on volreg, 7 years?

Originally Posted by Quiet

None.
There is no legal requirement to submit a "volreg" (Firearm Ownership Report).

The Firearm Ownership Report aka "volreg" is used by a CA resident to voluntarily register legally owned CA legal unregistered firearms (long guns acquired/owned before 2014 and handguns acquired via private party transfer before 1991).

Mr. "Quiet" is very correct regarding "Voluntary Registration." There is no requirement for Californians to voluntarily register firearms. The only real advantages to doing so are:

1) If you get arrested for a non-aggravated offense of CCW or Carrying a Loaded firearm, the offense is a misdemeanor if the weapon is registered to you and a felony if it is not.

2) If your weapons get snatched up by a law enforcement agency, they will need to be registered to you before they can released.

But the subject of this thread was not about "Voluntary Registration." It was about a gentleman who came into California as a "New Resident." "New Residents" are required to register their firearms within 60 days (with an exception for military folks stationed here on orders).

[Subotai]

DADT

[Marauder2003]

I don?t think our PPT law is worse that CA. Closer to the same. Must be done at an FFL. Plus we don?t have the roster.

Originally Posted by M1NM

Gift it to daughter have her register it. Of course if he went ahead and registered it probably nothing would happen since their only goal is finding out who/where guns are for the future.....
PS he's no longer a NV resident how does selling it there any different than in CA - they also have a PPT law that is worse than the CA one?

[Garand Hunter]

Just keepeth thy mouth shut and stay outa trouble.

Psalm 1

[tabascoz28]

Originally Posted by Marauder2003

I don?t think our PPT law is worse that CA. Closer to the same. Must be done at an FFL. Plus we don?t have the roster.

Yes, but PPT negates the roster. I've been able to get a .50DE, Walther P99c, and an AR pistol. Multiple friends got their 43(x)s.

[five.five-six]

Originally Posted by RickD427

Mr. "Quiet" is very correct regarding "Voluntary Registration." There is no requirement for Californians to voluntarily register firearms. The only real advantages to doing so are:

1) If you get arrested for a non-aggravated offense of CCW or Carrying a Loaded firearm, the offense is a misdemeanor if the weapon is registered to you and a felony if it is not.

2) If your weapons get snatched up by a law enforcement agency, they will need to be registered to you before they can released.

But the subject of this thread was not about "Voluntary Registration." It was about a gentleman who came into California as a "New Resident." "New Residents" are required to register their firearms within 60 days (with an exception for military folks stationed here on orders).

I've never really researched but always understood that is a "wobbler". This is the first I've read that the delineation is at registration status.

I's like to add to your list:

3) At least with my IA, the gun must be registered as yours to be listed on your LTC.

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by five.five-six

I've never really researched but always understood that is a "wobbler". This is the first I've read that the delineation is at registration status.

I's like to add to your list:

3) At least with my IA, the gun must be registered as yours to be listed on your LTC.

California only has three different levels of crime. There is no "Wobbler" as a level of crime. Please refer to Penal Code section 16 quoted below:

"Crimes and public offenses include:
1. Felonies;
2. Misdemeanors; and
3. Infractions."

What California does have is a number of felony crimes that can be alternately filed by a prosecutor as misdemeanors, or that a court can reduce to misdemeanors. Please refer to Penal Code section 17(b) quoted below:

"When a crime is punishable, in the discretion of the court, either by imprisonment in the state prison or imprisonment in a county jail under the provisions of subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or by fine or imprisonment in the county jail, it is a misdemeanor for all purposes under the following circumstances:
(1) After a judgment imposing a punishment other than imprisonment in the state prison or imprisonment in a county jail under the provisions of subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

(2) When the court, upon committing the defendant to the Division of Juvenile Justice, designates the offense to be a misdemeanor.

(3) When the court grants probation to a defendant and at the time of granting probation, or on application of the defendant or probation officer thereafter, the court declares the offense to be a misdemeanor.

(4) When the prosecuting attorney files in a court having jurisdiction over misdemeanor offenses a complaint specifying that the offense is a misdemeanor, unless the defendant at the time of arraignment or plea objects to the offense being made a misdemeanor, in which event the complaint shall be amended to charge the felony and the case shall proceed on the felony complaint.

(5) When, at or before the preliminary examination or prior to filing an order pursuant to Section 872, the magistrate determines that the offense is a misdemeanor, in which event the case shall proceed as if the defendant had been arraigned on a misdemeanor complaint.

Folks commonly describe such felonies as "Wobblers."

But it's important to note that a "Wobbler" is a felony, and nothing less than a felony until it actually "Wobbles." Them is a misdemeanor, and nothing more than a misdemeanor from that point on.

It's also important to note that only the prosecutor, or court, can "Wobble" a felony. The arresting agency cannot "Wobble" an offense. The earliest that an arrestee can see their felony "Wobbled" to a misdemeanor is when the case is filed, and that's usually on the second court day following the arrest.

That means a person arrested for a "Wobbler" gets booked on the felony, gets a felony arrest record, sits in a felony cell, and has felony bail.

It's also interesting to note from Penal Code 16 that California treats "Infractions" as "Crimes."

[M1NM]

Originally Posted by Marauder2003

I don?t think our PPT law is worse that CA. Closer to the same. Must be done at an FFL. Plus we don?t have the roster.

NV dealers can charge what they want - CA has a set fee.
NV dealers treat the deal as a normal sale requiring them to put the gun in their bound book.
I've seen many complaints on the NV board about dealers not wanting to store guns.
Different rules for CCW holders.

[five.five-six]

Originally Posted by RickD427

~Snipped for brevity~

But it's important to note that a "Wobbler" is a felony, and nothing less than a felony until it actually "Wobbles." Them is a misdemeanor, and nothing more than a misdemeanor from that point on.

It's also important to note that only the prosecutor, or court, can "Wobble" a felony. The arresting agency cannot "Wobble" an offense. The earliest that an arrestee can see their felony "Wobbled" to a misdemeanor is when the case is filed, and that's usually on the second court day following the arrest.

That means a person arrested for a "Wobbler" gets booked on the felony, gets a felony arrest record, sits in a felony cell, and has felony bail.

It's also interesting to note from Penal Code 16 that California treats "Infractions" as "Crimes."

Thanks for clarifying what I understood as a "wobbler". I had never thought about it but I guess it's logical that the discretion is not left to the LE.

So, I'm still not clear. If arrested for a concealed firearm in your possession, it will be a misdemeanor arrest, so long as the firearm is registered to you at the time and a felony if not registered?

Do you happen to know if other IAs issue LTCs with firearms not registered to the applicant or if that's just my IA?

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by five.five-six

Thanks for clarifying what I understood as a "wobbler". I had never thought about it but I guess it's logical that the discretion is not left to the LE.

So, I'm still not clear. If arrested for a concealed firearm in your possession, it will be a misdemeanor arrest, so long as the firearm is registered to you at the time and a felony if not registered?

Do you happen to know if other IAs issue LTCs with firearms not registered to the applicant or if that's just my IA?

I fled California more than ten years ago when I retired. At that time, very few agencies were issuing, and I never learned much about their policies. During my 30+ years as an LEO, I recall only twice encountering a person with a CCW permit (one of which was actor Gary Coleman).

As to getting arrested for CCW or Carrying Loaded in a Prohibited Area, you're pretty much correct. If the weapon is registered to you, and there are no other aggravating conditions, then the charge is a misdemeanor from the beginning. That generally means that you get released on a citation (either in the field or after booking). If it's not registered to you, then you go to jail for the felony and wait to see if the DA files misdemeanor. In the jurisdictions where I worked, the DAs would always file the felony charge and then use that a lever for plea negotiations. The catch there is that they would request a firearms prohibition as a condition of probation, even though the charge itself does not carry a prohibition. If you don't agree, then it's back to trial on the felony.