Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Firearms Theft Possession topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Prosecutors, police back bill to create distinct offense for possession of stolen firearms

5724350 · January 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Prosecutors and state police told the Senate Judiciary Committee that a statute creating a distinct offense for possession of stolen firearms would aid prosecutions and tracking of firearms recovered from crime scenes.

Santa Fe — The Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony supporting legislation that would create a distinct offense for possession of a stolen firearm.

Sponsor comments described the measure as a prosecutorial tool to ease burdens under the general stolen‑property statute, which requires proof of market value and can produce evidentiary fights about how to value recovered firearms. Rob Hart, an experienced prosecutor, said the change would simplify charging and help focus enforcement on firearms trafficking and suspects who repeatedly possess stolen weapons.

Law-enforcement witnesses, including a deputy chief with the state police, told the committee that stolen firearms are a frequent problem and that a distinct statutory offense would improve data collection and investigative options. The city of Albuquerque’s representative also testified in support, saying the city backs measures intended to protect communities and provide prosecutors with additional tools.

Committee members asked about interaction with existing felon-in-possession statutes and whether the new offense would stack with other charges. Prosecutors indicated charging choices are discretionary and that existing statutes — for example, felon-in-possession — often provide a stronger route in some cases; the draft includes language to avoid double charging for the same conduct.

No committee vote occurred; senators said they will review language and sentencing details before further action.