Howard

Howard v. Superior Court

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1016·233 Cal. App. 3d 1436·285 Cal. Rptr. 127·91 Daily Journal DAR 10956·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7227
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 14, 1991No. A054030California726 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chin, J.

Penal Code section 1417.6 1 authorizes the destruction of any dangerous weapon used by a defendant in the commission of a crime or possessed by the defendant upon arrest. Unless interpreted otherwise, the section might bar a lawful owner from recovering a stolen gun. We agree with the Attorney General that the statute would offend due process if applied to bar a rightful owner from recovering a stolen weapon. We grant a peremptory writ of mandate to allow petitioner Curtis Howard to seek to prove his right to recover his handgun.

*874 The record before us is sparse, but it does show that as of April 27, 1989, Howard was the registered owner of a handgun with serial No. 5385. Evidently, this is the same handgun mentioned in a November 23, 1990, police report by an off-duty police officer who heard three shots fired and saw Herbert Dean Mayo holding a recently fired gun as several people ran from Mayo. The gun became an exhibit in Mayo’s prosecution for possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of Penal Code section 12021.

Howard moved for return of his handgun, but the court denied the motion. The court explained that Mayo was a customer of Howard, who was a bail…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.