Has BOF 4010A (New Resident Firearm Ownership) ever been used in prosecution?

[.44]

My friend is asking me if a new CA resident who neglects to fill out form BOF 4010A (New Resident Report of Firearm Ownership) has ever been prosecuted or faced litigation?

In a hypothetical situation, how would someone be found to have neglected to complete the form, or find themselves in a situation where they should have? Do local/city police have access to these records, say you are at a range and an officer runs your serial number to make sure it belongs to you or isn't stolen? Would they see BOF 4010A was missing?

[Rustlin’ Jack]

I am going to chime in on this one, not because I actually know the answer to your question, but because I think it is an interesting question that will prove difficult to answer. From what I can gather, it is very difficult to find information on a particular Penal Code section that is rarely used and prosecuted somewhere in the state.

Many have wondered the same thing about Penal Code section 27585, which prohibits importing handguns to California that were purchased out of state. I have never seen a case that was prosecuted that would enlighten us as to the criteria relied upon for a successful prosecution. In addition, would a local district attorney’s office or the state Attorney General prosecute an offense such as this?

As commented on earlier in similar threads, it does not appear that a significant delay in filing the new resident paperwork would cause exposure to prosecution. If someone moved to California and did not report that they brought their guns with them, it would more likely cause problems if the guns were ever taken into custody by law-enforcement. In that case, proving ownership would be more difficult in an attempt to have the firearms returned. It is surprising how easily guns can end up in the hands of law enforcement, whether they are accidentally left in a public place and found by someone, or taken into protective custody if the owner has a medical emergency and is transported to the hospital.

It appears that the state does not put much effort into verifying ownership, even if the owner of an unregistered gun sells it through the proper private party transfer process. It appears, that the state is more interested in connecting a person and registration than determining where the gun originated.

I do not believe that local law-enforcement has any ability to know where a gun came from, only that it is currently unregistered. Unless that gun was used in a crime, they would not put any effort into tracking it through the original sale via the 4473.

I freely admit that much of my information is a WAG (wild *** guess) and and I hope it doesn’t steer you off base.

[.44]

I am going to chime in on this one, not because I actually know the answer to your question, but because I think it is an interesting question that will prove difficult to answer. The real answer will have to come from RickD, Librarian, or Quiet. From what I can gather, it is very difficult to find information on a particular Penal Code section that is rarely used and prosecuted somewhere in the state.

[Dvrjon]

My friend is asking me if a new CA resident who neglects to fill out form BOF 4010A (New Resident Report of Firearm Ownership) has ever been prosecuted or faced litigation?

Since being caught under these circumstances is a misdemeanor (CA PEN 27590), records specific to prosecution for such an offense would be scarce unless a conviction is appealed and the results are published.

More importantly, two aspects of the statutes may mitigate the inherent dangers of breaking this law and even result in a plea bargain to dismiss the charge if the guns are subsequently registered:

CA PEN 27570.
(a) It is the intent of the Legislature that a violation of Section 27560 or 27565 shall not constitute a “continuing offense” and the statute of limitations for commencing a prosecution for a violation of Section 27560 or 27565 commences on the date that the applicable grace period specified in Section 27560 or 27565 expires.

(b) Sections 27560 and 27565 shall not apply to a person who reports ownership of a firearm after the applicable grace period specified in Section 27560 or 27565 expires if evidence of that violation arises only as the result of the person submitting the report described in Section 27560 or 27565.

So, if you don't act, 3 years and 60 days after arrival, the SOL ends.(Some will remind us that the SOL can be tolled or stopped, but that seems unlikely, here.)

Importantly, if one does miss the grace period and later decides to register, the submission of the registration cannot be grounds for arrest for violation of the statute.

In a hypothetical situation, how would someone be found to have neglected to complete the form, or find themselves in a situation where they should have?

Law enforcement is summoned to your house for whatever reason...Domestic dispute; reporting a theft from the home. You're driving back from the range and you run a light, have a broken tail light, whatever... pick something. LEOs can ask if there are guns in the car, and can inspect them for "safety". If LEO have the opportunity to evaluate the firearm, it will not show up on the Registry or AFS. Non-Mirandized conversations can escalate the issue.

Do local/city police have access to these records,

Yes...CA Pen 27560(3)(e).

...say you are at a range and an officer runs your serial number to make sure it belongs to you or isn't stolen?

Why would they do that? Unless you provide probable cause, there's no reason for a firearms check by LEO and there is no California statute that requires all firearms to be registered, so running the gun won't reliably provide registration information.

Would they see BOF 4010A was missing?

The BOF 4010A can't be missing if it isn't required. LEO won't know it was required unless the one person there who knows it was required mentions it...don't do that.

The purpose of the statute is to identify and track guns. The state has many other, more effective, ways of incarcerating its citizens.

[.44]

Per CA penal code, criminal charges cannot be brought against someone that files BOD 4010A outside of the 60 day new-resident window

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1523432

[RickD427]

Per CA penal code, criminal charges cannot be brought against someone that files BOD 4010A outside of the 60 day new-resident window

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1523432

The statute does have a provision that prevents a person from being prosecuted where DOJ learns of the violation from a late report. The idea is that the state wants people to report, even if late, more than it wants to fang them for not reporting.

But it is still possible to prosecute the violation if DOJ learns of the late reporting by other means.

[mrdd]

Don't forget that you need at least one entry in AFS to buy ammo in California.

[Dvrjon]

Don't forget that you need at least one entry in AFS to buy ammo in California.

For a $1 fee. However, you still have the opportunity to pay $19 and wait 10 days.

[mrdd]

Don't forget that you need at least one entry in AFS to buy ammo in California.

For a $1 fee. However, you still have the opportunity to pay $19 and wait 10 days.

Right. I assume that no one would wish to do the latter.

[edgerly779]

I may have firearms i brought back when dad died in 1992. Forgot to volreg. Oh well. Lots of KARENS out there (LOL)