Back in 2014, Missouri residents voted overwhelmingly to amend the Missouri Bill of Rights. This section covers the right of Missouri citizens to bear arms. The new language clarifies that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right that cannot be restricted except when it serves a compelling government interest.
This amendment appeared to be in direct conflict with a Missouri statute (passed by legislators, not voters). The statute in question states that an individual who has either (1) been convicted of a felony in Missouri or (2) been convicted of an offense outside of Missouri that is classified as a felony in Missouri is prohibited from possessing a firearm. A felon in possession of a firearm in Missouri is guilty of a class C felony, punishable by up to seven years in prison.
Opponents of the amendment argued that this provision failed to clarify whether the new amendment circumvented the felon in possession of a firearm law and gave felons an inalienable right to possess weapons.
State of Missouri v. McCoy
Santonio McCoy had a criminal history of burglary, theft, and unlawful use of a firearm. In June 2012, he was caught in possession of a gun and convicted of violating the felon firearm statute. In a separate case, in November 2012, Marcus Merritt was convicted of unlawful possession of a revolver, rifle, and shotgun under the felon in possession statute because he had a 1986 felony conviction for drug distribution. These convictions occurred at least two years before Missouri voters approved the amendment.
Both McCoy and Merritt appealed, and arguments before the Missouri Supreme Court occurred after the amendment was enacted in fall 2014. The two appellants argued that the felon in possession statute was unconstitutional because it directly violated their right to bear arms.
The defense attorneys and the prosecutors urged the Missouri Supreme Court to clarify the status of the statute in light of the new amendment. However, because both men were convicted prior to the enactment, the Missouri Supreme Court ultimately declined to rule using the most recent version of the amendment because the amendment does not apply ex post facto.
Lessons Learned from McCoy and Merritt
So where does that leave us now? The Missouri Supreme Court used the old version of the amendment in ruling that the statute is not unconstitutional. The Court stated that the legislature is permitted to pass reasonable restrictions on firearm possession when it serves a compelling government interest. Keeping guns out of the hands of convicts is a compelling government interest.
Even though the statute has not yet been analyzed using the new amendment, the Missouri Supreme Court did examine the convictions based on the tests required by the new amendment. Since the voters included language that the general assembly can restrict the rights of convicted violent felons, it is likely that the felony firearm possession statute will continue to be enforced.
Authored by Jessica Long, LegalMatch Legal Writer
Comments