Veteran Faces a Possible 21 Year Sentence for Magazine Possession

[swilliams]

Apologies if this has already been posted. Didn't see it, but that doesn't mean it's not here somewhere.

Blog: Veteran faces 21 years in prison for possession of pistol magazines

"Simeon D. Mokhiber, a Niagara Falls, N.Y. Army veteran, was convicted April 21 on three felony counts of possessing "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" under Gov. Andrew Cuomo's SAFE Act.

Mokhiber served nine years in the U.S. Army and participated in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He subsequently worked as an armed private security contractor in Iraq and Afghanistan and was formerly licensed as an armed security guard in New York. He is the father of an eight-year-old with disabilities and had no prior criminal record."

 

[NY Leatherneck]

Gets me pissed off reading that article and the Cuomo bit in there. Can't stand that douche.

 

[Robin]

FUACUPOS!
Robin

 

[Robin]

Illegal search, probably an illegal stop. I think the guy was set up.
Robin

 

[swilliams]

Wish I'd been on that jury.

 

[GOYABEAN]

NYS has become a bad episode of the twilight zone

 

[Defilade]

And I'm sure the NRA will swing the cost of his lawyers to fight this? Because after all they have done such a bang up job for the people of NY.

 

[The30oz]

This is the guy who was drunk and speeding from the article in the other post correct?

 

[livingston]

This is the guy who was drunk and speeding from the article in the other post correct?

NY Army Veteran Charged with Possessing Pistol Magazines Faces 21 Years in Prison – USSA News | The Tea Party's Front Page

Niagra County – A NY Army Veteran charged with violation of New York’s SAFE act faces 21 years in prison after his conviction on Friday, April 21. But is isn’t the weapon itself that caused his plight, it was the three pistol magazines he had in a locked box in his car when stopped by police in April of 2016. No weapon was found, but each magazine is punishable by 7 years in prison.

Simeon D. Mokhiber, 41 was arrested on April 18, 2016 and given field sobriety tests for possible DUI. He was allegedly speeding as well as being DUI. He also had not been drinking, and was ultimately acquitted of that charge. But inside his vehicle- in a locked gun box- were three pistol magazines capable of firing more than 10 rounds.

Police can search a vehicle incident to arrest, according to long standing Supreme Court rulings. But the locked box is problematic, and probably should have required a search warrant, given that Mr. Mokhiber did not give them permission to search it.

 

[carpediem]

Meanwhile illegals driving drunk are released out the back door quietly with no penalty......

 

[thegatman]

Time for another boating accident?

 

[71velle]

Search without a warrant? No consent. I have a feeling this will go away quietly..

 

[Automan21]

Its funny how more than 7 rounds get you 7 years.

 

[Shadow2]

Well i really don't care what his background is or was because it panders to the "experience" side of the gun grabber debate .. in fact it doesn't matter who or what he has done it matters what he didn't do ... he wasn't in the process of violating anyone else's rights, planning to violate anyone else's rights or purposely destroying property, the only factors that constitute a crime to begin with. this crap needs to end and end soon.

 

[MikeM]

This is the guy who was drunk and speeding from the article in the other post correct?

No, this is the guy accused of drunk driving and speeding and was found not guilty of either.

 

[Jem45472]

NY Army Veteran Charged with Possessing Pistol Magazines Faces 21 Years in Prison – USSA News | The Tea Party's Front Page

Niagra County – A NY Army Veteran charged with violation of New York’s SAFE act faces 21 years in prison after his conviction on Friday, April 21. But is isn’t the weapon itself that caused his plight, it was the three pistol magazines he had in a locked box in his car when stopped by police in April of 2016. No weapon was found, but each magazine is punishable by 7 years in prison.

Simeon D. Mokhiber, 41 was arrested on April 18, 2016 and given field sobriety tests for possible DUI. He was allegedly speeding as well as being DUI. He also had not been drinking, and was ultimately acquitted of that charge. But inside his vehicle- in a locked gun box- were three pistol magazines capable of firing more than 10 rounds.

Police can search a vehicle incident to arrest, according to long standing Supreme Court rulings. But the locked box is problematic, and probably should have required a search warrant, given that Mr. Mokhiber did not give them permission to search it.

Problem is he was arrested, then the car impounded and "inventoried". No warrant needed.

Thinking back on it - all charges were dropped, shouldn't the search have been dropped also since it turns out this was nothing other than a traffic stop?
@Airborneguy @GOPerfect

 

[GOPerfect]

Search without a warrant? No consent. I have a feeling this will go away quietly..

No search warrant is needed. An arrest was made, vehicle was inventoried.

 

[Jem45472]

Search without a warrant? No consent. I have a feeling this will go away quietly..

Not going away, a jury convicted him already. He's awaiting sentencing.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I'm not saying this is what happened but what would happen if let's say he was stopped for no reason and via dashcam or something it was shown that he passed a field sobriety.

Would the inventory be thrown out? Just a hypothetical question.

 

[DoD1776]

"RIOTER THROWING M80s At trump supporter faces 0 days in prison"

 

[Jem45472]

I'm not saying this is what happened but what would happen if let's say he was stopped for no reason and via dashcam or something it was shown that he passed a field sobriety.

Would the inventory be thrown out? Just a hypothetical question.

That's what I want to know. Bottom line is charges were dismissed, why would an unwarranted search stick? I get it was technically not a search but an inventory.

 

[livingston]

It will not be thrown out . If they found drugs alone in that box would they not prosecute that.. When Cuomo runs for president this will be added to the head count of safe act arrests that Cuomo enacted to keep NY state crime free ....That head count is all that is worried about .... As I did for NY I will do for the nation ...

 

[Trauma47645]

No search warrant is needed. An arrest was made, vehicle was inventoried.

So basically your saying is that people just need to be wrongfully arrested for an unwarranted search to occur of their property, which could lead to actual charges..

Sounds like there is no 4th amendment anymore

 

[Robin]

Not speeding, not drunk, somebody set this guy up. Wish I had the dough, I'd hire a PI for this guy. Heads would roll.
Robin

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

I'd be curious to know if he has a pistol on his permit to match these mags. And for those that think it's safe to go to the range with whatever you want here is the story of someone getting prosecuted for a safe act violation. BTW, isn't this the "pure" safe act case we've been waiting for?

 

[Pale Rider]

"So basically your saying is that people just need to be wrongfully arrested for an unwarranted search to occur of their property, which could lead to actual charges..

Sounds like there is no 4th amendment anymore"

The fact that someone is acquitted doesn't mean that the arrest was wrongful. It only takes probable cause to make a lawful arrest. It takes more to get a conviction.

 

[GOPerfect]

I mentioned in another thread similar to this; there are many, many people, both on this forum as well as America in general that really need to read a bit more and do some serious research on laws and court cases.

There is so much mis-information being thrown all around.

So basically your saying is that people just need to be wrongfully arrested for an unwarranted search to occur of their property, which could lead to actual charges..

So, in this statement, you are assuming that the guy was wrongly arrested? Do you have ANY evidence to back that statement up? I didn't think so.

I'm not saying this is what happened but what would happen if let's say he was stopped for no reason and via dashcam or something it was shown that he passed a field sobriety.

If he would have taken the sobriety tests, I do not believe it would have gone as far as it did.

Knowing and understanding the law can never be a bad thing, research is a good thing.

 

[Trauma47645]

"So basically your saying is that people just need to be wrongfully arrested for an unwarranted search to occur of their property, which could lead to actual charges..

Sounds like there is no 4th amendment anymore"

The fact that someone is acquitted doesn't mean that the arrest was wrongful. It only takes probable cause to make a lawful arrest. It takes more to get a conviction.

I wasnt necessarily referring to this case.. i was making a generalized statement.. So you made it clear that all that needs to happen is the "officer" needs to "reasonably believe" that someone did something wrong to affect an arrest, and then circumvent the 4th amendment to search a vehicle..

 

[Airborneguy]

Not guilty does not equal unwarranted arrest. That's all I'll address because I don't know anything about the case and don't care to "defend" these charges anyway.

As with the last thread on a similar topic, that's a major misunderstanding many here seem to have.

"Not guilty" is based on beyond a reasonable doubt as determined by either a jury or a judge. The legal threshold for arrest is probable cause, a lower standard of proof. If probable cause exists, then the arrest was not "bad" or "illegal" or whatever else posters here want to call it. As such, any evidence recovered would be admissable.

 

[nortatoga]

I just read up on the 4th Amendment good read ! I highly recommend it!!!