{"id":16863,"date":"2018-06-15T08:48:00","date_gmt":"2018-06-15T12:48:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.gunpoliticsny.com\/?p=16863"},"modified":"2018-06-15T08:48:00","modified_gmt":"2018-06-15T12:48:00","slug":"people-v-wallace","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.gunpoliticsny.com\/?p=16863","title":{"rendered":"People v. Wallace"},"content":{"rendered":"

The New York Court of Appeals<\/a> issued a ruling last month in the case of People v. Wallace<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

Briefly:<\/p>\n

“… Defendant was working as a swing manager at a McDonald\u2019s restaurant<\/a> when a gun in the pockets of his pants fired, causing an injury to the lower part of his right leg. Defendant was charged with criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law 265.03. Defendant moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the \u201cplace of business\u201d exception to section 265.03(3) applied because he possessed the firearm at his workplace. Supreme Court denied the motion and convicted Defendant. The Appellate Division affirmed. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that because Defendant was not the principal operator of the McDonald\u2019s when he possessed the loaded firearm in the establishment, the \u201cplace of business\u201d exception to section 265.03(3) was inapplicable …”<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Read the full decision here<\/a>.<\/p>\n