Defensa Federal de Armas — Texas 18 USC 922(o)/(k)/(j) + NFA + 924(c)

18 USC 922(o) — machine gun ban

18 USC seccion 922(o) prohibits transfer or possession of machine guns:

Statutory text. Unlawful to transfer or possess machine gun. Two exceptions: (1) transfer or possession by or under authority of United States or department/agency thereof; (2) lawful transfer or possession before May 19, 1986 effective date (grandfathered machine guns).

Machine gun definition. 26 USC seccion 5845(b): any weapon which shoots, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by single function of trigger. Includes frame or receiver of such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting weapon into machine gun.

Penalty. 18 USC seccion 924(a)(2): maximum 10 years (note: increased to 15 years pending recent legislation). USSG seccion 2K2.1 sentencing frequently produces Guidelines range 24-48 months for first-time defendants without aggravating factors.

Common factual scenarios:

• Auto-sears or "machine gun conversion devices" (MGCDs) — small parts that convert semi-auto weapons to fully automatic. Increasingly charged in last 5-7 years.
• Modified AR-15 platform weapons.
• Glock switches (auto sears for Glock handguns).
• Force-reset triggers (subject to ongoing litigation re: whether they constitute machine guns).
• Bump stocks (litigation pending; ATF interpretation changed multiple times — Garland v. Cargill, 602 U.S. __ (2024), held bump stocks not machine guns under statutory definition).
• Pre-1986 grandfathered transferable machine guns (legitimately possessed but transferred outside restrictions).

Common defenses:

• Statutory definition challenge — does item meet machine gun definition? Post-Cargill, bump stocks excluded. Other items potentially excludable.
• Knowledge requirement — must know item is machine gun. Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 (1994), requires knowledge of characteristics making item firearm subject to NFA.
• Authorization defenses — possession by licensed dealer or military, grandfathered status.
• Constructive vs. actual possession analysis.
• Constitutional challenges post-Bruen (in development).

Cargill impact on bump stock prosecutions. Garland v. Cargill, 602 U.S. __ (2024), held bump stocks are not machine guns under statutory definition. Decision invalidated ATF 2018 regulation. Defendants previously convicted of bump stock possession may have grounds for relief. Pending or new charges based on bump stocks cannot proceed under seccion 922(o).

18 USC 922(k) — altered or removed serial numbers

18 USC seccion 922(k) prohibits firearms with altered, obliterated, or removed serial numbers:

Statutory text. Unlawful for any person knowingly to transport, ship, or receive in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm which has had importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered, or to possess or receive any firearm which has had importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered and has, at any time, been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

Penalty. 18 USC seccion 924(a)(1): maximum 5 years. USSG seccion 2K2.1(b)(4)(B) provides +4 levels for altered/obliterated serial number in other firearm prosecutions.

Elements:

• Knowing transport, shipment, receipt, possession.
• Firearm with removed, obliterated, or altered serial number.
• Interstate commerce nexus.

Bruen-era constitutional challenges. United States v. Price, 635 F. Supp. 3d 455 (S.D.W. Va. 2022) — held seccion 922(k) unconstitutional under Bruen "text, history, tradition" test. Reasoning: no founding-era analog to serial number requirements (since serial numbers post-date Founding). Decision created circuit split — most courts have rejected Price reasoning. United States v. Reyna, No. 21-cr-41 (N.D. Ind. 2022), affirmed seccion 922(k). Litigation ongoing.

Common factual scenarios:

• Firearm with serial scratched or filed off.
• Firearm with serial chemically removed.
• Firearm with new serial overstamped on old serial.
• Firearm with serial covered by paint or other material.
• "Ghost gun" with no serial — but seccion 922(k) requires originally serialized firearm with subsequently altered serial. Privately manufactured firearms (PMFs) with no serial originally not covered by seccion 922(k); often charged under different statutes including 18 USC seccion 922(a) for unlicensed manufacture.

Common defenses:

• Knowledge requirement — must know serial altered.
• Forensic challenge to allegation serial was altered (natural wear, defect, manufacturing variation).
• Bruen-based constitutional challenge.
• Search warrant challenge.
• Possession analysis (actual vs. constructive).

18 USC 922(j) — stolen firearms

18 USC seccion 922(j) prohibits receipt or possession of stolen firearms:

Statutory text. Unlawful for any person to receive, possess, conceal, store, barter, sell, or dispose of any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, or to pledge or accept as security for a loan any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, which is moving as, which is a part of, which constitutes, or which has been shipped or transported in, interstate or foreign commerce, either before or after it was stolen, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the firearm or ammunition was stolen.

Penalty. 18 USC seccion 924(a)(2): maximum 10 years.

Elements:

• Receipt, possession, concealment, storage, barter, sale, or disposal.
• Stolen firearm or ammunition.
• Interstate commerce nexus.
• Knowing or having reasonable cause to believe stolen.

Mens rea analysis. Statute requires "knowing or having reasonable cause to believe" — either actual knowledge or reckless disregard of facts. United States v. Ruelas-Carrasco, 100 F.3d 1247 (7th Cir. 1996), and Fifth Circuit cases. Lower mens rea than pure knowledge offenses but still requires something more than mere possession.

Common factual scenarios:

• Firearm traced to specific burglary or theft.
• Firearm purchased from individual claiming theft.
• Firearm with serial number traceable in stolen firearms database.
• Co-defendant providing stolen firearm.
• Firearm recovered in possession of someone other than registered owner.

Common defenses:

• Knowledge challenge — defendant did not know or have reason to know firearm was stolen.
• Purchase from licensed dealer.
• Inheritance or gift from family member.
• Mistaken identification of firearm as stolen.
• Constructive possession analysis.
• Interstate nexus challenge (rare success since most firearms traveled in interstate commerce at some point).

National Firearms Act — 26 USC 5841-5872

The National Firearms Act (NFA) bajo 26 USC seccion 5841-5872 imposes registration and tax requirements on specific firearm types:

NFA-regulated items (26 USC seccion 5845):

• Machine guns: defined above. $200 tax stamp; transfers restricted to pre-1986 registered weapons.
• Short-barreled rifles (SBRs): rifles with barrel length less than 16 inches or overall length less than 26 inches. $200 tax stamp required for manufacture or transfer.
• Short-barreled shotguns (SBSs): shotguns with barrel length less than 18 inches or overall length less than 26 inches. $200 tax stamp.
• Silencers (suppressors): any device for silencing, muffling, or diminishing report of portable firearm. $200 tax stamp.
• Destructive devices: explosive, incendiary, poison gas weapons; firearms with bore over 1/2 inch (excluding shotguns commonly used for sporting purposes); combinations of parts. $200 tax stamp.
• "Any other weapons" (AOWs): concealable weapons firing fixed ammunition. $5 transfer tax (lower than other categories).

Registration requirement. All NFA items must be registered in National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) maintained by ATF. Possession of unregistered NFA item is felony bajo 26 USC seccion 5861(d).

Penalties. 26 USC seccion 5871: maximum $10,000 fine and 10 years imprisonment for NFA violations. USSG seccion 2K2.1 applies — base offense level 18 for NFA item; specific characteristic enhancements apply.

Common NFA prosecutions:

• Unregistered SBR (AR-15 with short barrel without registration).
• Unregistered silencer (homemade or commercially obtained).
• Unregistered machine gun.
• Unregistered destructive device (improvised explosive, modified flare gun).
• Solvent trap conversion (solvent trap kits modified into silencers — increasingly charged).
• 3D-printed firearms components.

Common defenses:

• Knowledge requirement — Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 (1994), held conviction requires knowledge of characteristics making item subject to NFA. Defense: defendant did not know rifle barrel was under 16 inches, did not know item was silencer, etc.
• Statutory definition challenges — does item meet NFA definition?
• Registration status defense — item may be registered to predecessor in interest.
• Built-in registration defense (limited to specific cases).
• Constitutional challenges post-Bruen.
• Inverse exception challenges (Haynes v. United States, 390 U.S. 85 (1968) Fifth Amendment defense).

Pistol brace litigation. ATF 2023 rule reclassifying many pistol brace-equipped firearms as SBRs subject to NFA. Mock v. Garland, 75 F.4th 563 (5th Cir. 2023), preliminary injunction. Final litigation continues. Many defendants previously compliant under prior ATF guidance now facing potential NFA violations. Defense includes reliance on prior ATF classifications, knowledge challenges.

18 USC 924(c) — firearms in violent/drug crime

18 USC seccion 924(c) imposes mandatory consecutive sentences for firearm use in connection with violent or drug trafficking crime:

Statutory text. Any person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime, uses or carries a firearm, or who, in furtherance of any such crime, possesses a firearm shall, in addition to punishment provided for such crime: receive specific consecutive sentences.

Mandatory consecutive sentences (post-First Step Act):

• Base. Mandatory minimum 5 years consecutive.
• Brandished. Mandatory minimum 7 years consecutive.
• Discharged. Mandatory minimum 10 years consecutive.
• Short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, semiautomatic assault weapon. Mandatory minimum 10 years.
• Machine gun, destructive device, silencer. Mandatory minimum 30 years.
• Second or subsequent conviction. Mandatory minimum 25 years (down from 25 stacked per count pre-First Step Act).
• Second or subsequent — machine gun, etc. Mandatory minimum life.

First Step Act fix to stacking. Pre-First Step Act, multiple seccion 924(c) counts in same indictment "stacked" — second count of same indictment received 25-year mandatory minimum. Resulted in extreme sentences (e.g., 55-year mandatory minimum for two robbery counts with firearm). First Step Act of 2018 fixed by requiring conviction to be "final" before subsequent enhancement applies. Defendants sentenced pre-First Step Act for stacked counts may have grounds for relief.

"Crime of violence" definition. 18 USC seccion 924(c)(3) defines crime of violence as felony having element of use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force, or felony involving substantial risk of physical force (residual clause).

• United States v. Davis, 588 U.S. __ (2019). Held residual clause unconstitutionally vague. Only force clause survives. Excludes many predicate offenses previously covered.
• Borden v. United States, 593 U.S. 420 (2021). Held recklessness insufficient for crime of violence under force clause. Excludes reckless-only predicate offenses.
• United States v. Taylor, 596 U.S. 845 (2022). Held attempted Hobbs Act robbery does not qualify as crime of violence — no actual or attempted use of force.

"Drug trafficking crime" definition. Drug trafficking offense punishable by maximum 1+ years imprisonment under federal law. Includes most CSA offenses.

Defense strategies:

• Challenge predicate offense as crime of violence (Davis, Borden, Taylor analysis).
• Challenge "in furtherance of" or "during and in relation to" connection between firearm and crime.
• Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993) — "uses" requires active employment.
• Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 (1995) — "uses" requires active employment, not just possession.
• Watson v. United States, 552 U.S. 74 (2007) — receipt of firearm in exchange for drugs not "use."
• Challenge brandishing/discharge enhancements.
• Constructive vs. actual possession analysis.
• First Step Act re-sentencing for pre-2018 stacking cases.

Bruen analysis — Second Amendment post-Heller

New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), transformed Second Amendment analysis:

Pre-Bruen framework. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), recognized individual Second Amendment right. McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), incorporated against states. Lower courts applied tiered scrutiny — intermediate scrutiny for most laws affecting Second Amendment, strict scrutiny for core right burdens.

Bruen holding. Rejected tiered scrutiny. Established new "text, history, tradition" test:

1. Does Second Amendment text cover the conduct? If yes, conduct is presumptively protected.
2. Government must demonstrate the regulation is consistent with this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Post-Bruen litigation. Multiple federal weapons provisions facing constitutional challenges:

• 18 USC seccion 922(g)(1) felon in possession. Range v. Attorney General, 69 F.4th 96 (3d Cir. 2023) (en banc) — held seccion 922(g)(1) unconstitutional as applied to nonviolent felon. Vincent v. Bondi, 80 F.4th 1197 (10th Cir. 2023) — different result. Circuit split.
• 18 USC seccion 922(g)(8) domestic violence restraining order. United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024) — upheld seccion 922(g)(8) under Bruen, finding historical tradition of disarming dangerous persons. Important guidance for post-Bruen analysis generally.
• 18 USC seccion 922(g)(3) drug users. United States v. Daniels, 77 F.4th 337 (5th Cir. 2023) — held unconstitutional as applied to marijuana user. United States v. Connelly, 117 F.4th 269 (5th Cir. 2024) — further developed analysis. Pending Supreme Court review.
• 18 USC seccion 922(k) altered serials. See discussion above — circuit split developing.
• NFA registration requirements. Mock v. Garland, 75 F.4th 563 (5th Cir. 2023), preliminary injunction on ATF pistol brace rule. Other NFA challenges in development.

Rahimi guidance. United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024), provided important post-Bruen guidance:

• Bruen does not require "twin" historical regulation.
• Analogous (not identical) historical regulation sufficient.
• Two metrics: (1) why regulation imposed; (2) how regulation imposed.
• Historical tradition of disarming individuals who pose credible threat to physical safety of others.
• Did not categorically address all Bruen questions.

Defense application:

• Bruen challenges should be preserved in every weapons case.
• Pre-trial motion to dismiss based on Bruen.
• Develop factual record on absence of historical tradition.
• Distinguish from Rahimi facts (specific dangerousness finding).
• Argue for "as applied" challenges where defendant lacks history of violence or dangerous conduct.
• Coordinate with national Bruen litigation developments.

Que esperar en TXND/TXED weapons case

Federal weapons cases en DFW area have specific characteristics:

Investigation. ATF leads most federal weapons investigations. FBI handles cases involving terrorism, racketeering, organized crime aspects. DEA handles cases involving drug-firearm connections. Local police involvement common — task force operations frequent.

Federal-state coordination. Texas state law (Penal Code Chapters 46, 47) parallels much of federal weapons law. Federal charges typically pursued when: (1) defendant has serious criminal history triggering federal prohibited person status; (2) drug-firearm nexus; (3) NFA item involved; (4) interstate commerce trafficking; (5) violent crime with firearm.

TXND/TXED prosecution patterns:

• Strong emphasis on Project Safe Neighborhoods priorities (felon in possession, violent felony plus firearm).
• Increasing prosecutions of MGCD (machine gun conversion device) cases.
• NFA cases (unregistered silencers, SBRs) regularly prosecuted.
• 924(c) charges added to drug and violent crime cases for sentence leverage.
• Bruen-era declination decisions emerging — some cases declined in light of Bruen uncertainty.

Typical case progression:

• Initial appearance and detention hearing.
• Indictment typically within 30 days.
• Discovery — typically extensive in firearms cases (ATF reports, forensic analysis, expert reports, co-defendant statements).
• Motion practice — suppression, Daubert challenges to ATF expert testimony, Bruen-based motions to dismiss.
• Plea negotiations.
• Trial or sentencing within 6-12 months typical.

Common forensic issues:

• ATF NFA classification of items.
• Toolmark and firearms identification testimony.
• Functional testing of firearms.
• Trace evidence (DNA, fingerprints on firearm).
• Serial number restoration techniques.
• Ammunition functional analysis.
• Digital evidence (text messages re: firearm transactions).

Sentencing considerations:

• USSG seccion 2K2.1 base offense levels (12-26 depending on offense and defendant status).
• Specific characteristics: stolen firearm (+2), altered serial (+4), large capacity magazine, multiple firearms.
• 924(c) mandatory consecutive sentences.
• ACCA 15-year mandatory minimum if applicable.
• Career offender enhancement may apply.
• Cooperation potential (5K1.1) particularly valuable in weapons trafficking cases.

Para una evaluacion gratuita y confidencial de su federal weapons case, llame al (972) 370-5060. L and L Law Group, PLLC representa a clientes en federal weapons cases en TXND y TXED. Reggie London (Bar #24043514, admitido en TXND, TXED y 5th Cir.) maneja estos casos directamente.