Court backs felon's gun possession

Josey1

Court backs felon's gun possession BY ALAN COOPERTIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER Oct 24, 2001 Self-defense can be a defense to a charge of possessing a firearm by a felon, the Virginia Court of Appeals ruled yesterday.The issue arose from the conviction of William Michael Humphrey last year in New Kent County Circuit Court.Humphrey admitted firing two blasts from a shotgun on Dec. 29, 1999, but told a jury he did so because a man was firing a gun from the bottom of his driveway toward his mobile home.His attorney asked Judge Thomas B. Hoover to instruct the jury that use of the gun in the reasonable belief that he was in danger of being killed was a defense to the charge of having a gun after having been convicted of a felony.Hoover refused. He concluded that the law prohibiting the possession of a firearm by a felon contained an implicit rejection of an exception for self-defense. The judge also ruled that Humphrey could have protected himself by retreating to the rear of the trailer or into the woods.Without the instruction, the jury convicted Humphrey of the offense, and Hoover imposed the mandatory five-year prison term. Humphrey has been free on bond pending appeal.Humphrey testified that he was drinking with three friends the night of the shooting before his girlfriend came to the home. After she arrived, he asked the friends to leave. Two of them didn't want to do so, and one of them told him, "I'll get you" before leaving angrily.About 20 minutes later, he heard gunshots and saw flashes of gunfire from a truck similar to that driven by the men who had left, Humphrey said.While his girlfriend called authorities, Humphrey said, he got a shotgun and fired two blasts from it into the air.The firing from the driveway stopped, and he threw the shotgun on top of the trailer.When a deputy sheriff arrived, Humphrey admitted firing the shots and directed the deputy to the weapon. After the deputy and Humphrey were unable to find any bullet holes in the trailer, he was charged with the offense. At his trial, Humphrey said he later found a bullet hole near where he was standing when the shooting began.Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel of the intermediate appellate court, Judge Larry G. Elder said Humphrey was entitled to the jury instruction because his testimony, if believed, showed that his possession of the gun "was for the purpose of self-defense and lasted only as long as necessary for appellant to defend himself and his girlfriend."Betty Layne DesPortes, the attorney who represented Humphrey on appeal, said she was surprised to learn when researching the case that the issue had not been addressed squarely in earlier appeals.Elder sent the case back to circuit court for a new trial with the instruction. The government can ask the full Court of Appeals to rehear the case or appeal it to the Virginia Supreme Court. http://www.timesdispatch.com/vametro/MGBGTY6H6TC.html

---

Contact Alan Cooper at (804) 649-6649 or acooper@timesdispatch.com Please also read the text of the decision http://www.lweekly.com/vacoa/1982002.htm

booger

I was on a Grand Jury when a similar case was presented before us. It was a crazy man attacking a family and a guy with an old felony grabbed his wifes gun and killed the attacker. We didn't even indict the man, he had served his time and did what was right in stopping the crazed attacker.The case Josey posted is a little "fishy" though.