Originally Posted by JimDandy
...It would be interesting to see how that interacts with HAYNES v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 85 (1968)
IF you can't possess it without registering it -
AND the registry is closed
THEN isn't it a 5A violation similar to, but not exactly like Haynes?...
Smith was charged with possession of a rifle which is illegal to possess in California. That's really all there is to it.
If Smith had possessed the rifle as a resident of California before its possession became illegal, and if when possession became illegal he had registered is as was then provided for under California law, those facts would have been an affirmative defense to the charge of possession of an illegal rifle. But neither of those facts is true.
So it's simply a matter that Smith was found in possession of contraband (i. e., something which may not lawfully possessed). The long expired California amnesty is irrelevant.