Request to drop gun charge against Astacio denied; case heads to grand jury

[livingston]

Request to drop gun charge against Astacio denied; case heads to grand jury
Suspended Rochester City Court Judge Leticia Astacio who allegedly tried to purchase a shotgun in violation of her probation appeared in Henrietta Town Court Wednesday.

The judge decided the case will now go to a grand jury.

Advertisement – Content Continues Below
Astacio is charged with attempted criminal purchase or disposal of a weapon, a class E felony. According to court paperwork, Astacio went to two Dick's Sporting Goods stores back in April and tried to buy a gun. She has been on probation in connection to a DWI conviction from August of 2016.

Wednesday, Astacio's defense attorney argued an unloaded shotgun does not meet the definition of a firearm or dangerous weapon as part of her probation conditions and asked for the charge to be dismissed.

More at ...
Request to drop gun charge against Astacio denied; case heads to grand jury

 

[livingston]

We shall see if laws are for the little people ....

 

[Deplorable Me]

So an unloaded Bushmaster is not an assault wespon? Maybe she should call Andy?

 

[BDinPutnam]

If I were the kid behind the counter, I think I would've let her fill out the 4473 and then blown her up with the Feds.

 

[Bob]

One of the conditions of her probation states
"9. Probationer shall be prohibited from possessing a firearm, dangerous weapon, or noxious substance."

Her attorney is arguing that she is permitted to possess an unloaded shotgun because it does not meet the legal definitions of either "firearm" "dangerous weapon" or "noxious substance" as defined in NYS Penal Law.

The problem is that "firearm" has a definition under NYS Penal Law and "dangerous weapon" and "noxious substance" do not. This is why the judge stated that this would be an issue for the attorney to argue on appeal.

 

[Grimscale]

If I were the kid behind the counter, I think I would've let her fill out the 4473 and then blown her up with the Feds.

To what end?
It's not like the Feds follow up on denied 4473s, or even relevant tips of terroristic behavior.

 

[Deplorable Me]

Cuomo will pardon her.

 

[cgrutt]

Cuomo will pardon her.

Yeah but Trump will get her on Federal charges!!! ... oh, wait wrong playbook damn it...

 

[Shadow2]

Still an interesting argument, have any weapons or firearms on you ... Nope just my shotgun ... peace out coper ..

 

[Acer-m14]

if she is allowed a unloaded shotgun .. then she can't have ammo anywhere near by .. just having the ammo ie .. shotgun in car and ammo in car trunk .. you have both and its considered loaded
in NY ..

noxious substance

is in the law books .. not in the gun law section .. stink bombs IE .. wish also means you can get charged for FARTING ..

New York Consolidated Laws, Penal Law - PEN § 270.05 Unlawfully possessing or selling noxious material

 

[Bob]

She could buy the shotgun alone, take it home and lock it up, and then make another trip for the ammo.

“Noxious MATERIAL” is defined in penal law. “Noxious SUBSTANCE” is not. She is prohibited from possessing “noxious substance” by the terms of her probation.

Not saying the argument is right or wrong, just that it’s what the argument is. And to be fair, it’s the exact same type of nit-picking that we do here all the time.

 

[SNORTHRUP1]

Every time I see her on TV coming & going from court she makes me sick due to her always having a huge smile on her face like she's happy she's coming & going from court. Not to mention she had her judge license revoked and CAN NOT serve as a judge, but is still being paid as if she was serving on the bench everyday.

 

[@thewheels]

One of the conditions of her probation states
"9. Probationer shall be prohibited from possessing a firearm, dangerous weapon, or noxious substance."

Her attorney is arguing that she is permitted to possess an unloaded shotgun because it does not meet the legal definitions of either "firearm" "dangerous weapon" or "noxious substance" as defined in NYS Penal Law.

The problem is that "firearm" has a definition under NYS Penal Law and "dangerous weapon" and "noxious substance" do not. This is why the judge stated that this would be an issue for the attorney to argue on appeal.

The attorney isn't wrong here.
Semantics or not, a loaded/unloaded shotgun ≠ dangerous weapon.