Texan Convicted for Selling Gun to Illegal Alien

[Ben]

I just saw this on another forum and don't know more about it than what's at the link. Any of you Texans know more? Said illegal apparently had a valid Texas driver's license. It appears the illegal was not prosecuted, only the seller.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=38088

[Scout26]

It appears the illegal oppressed worker, doing work that American's won't  was not prosecuted, only the seller evil, greedy, running dog, capitalist oppressor.

See how much clearer it is, once tranlate it into "Obamanewspeek".

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

on one of the thr's there is a thread with a guy who was there at the show  saw the incident.  i can't remember his take on it well but i thought i remembered him thinking the buyer wasn't right  i could be wrong though my crs is strong  my use of the search feature not so much  i think it was .us but i'm not sure

[TommyGunn]

    The buyer had a driver's license.  Oh yea ... he was Latino and spoke spanish and had "cowboy" cloths .... but if a policeman had stopped him .... that would be "profiling."

[HankB]

The story is also posted at the Texas State Rifle Association (TSRA) website:

https://www.tsra.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=256:casualty-of-the-austin-gun-show-chaos&catid=55:tripp-talk&Itemid=113

While the TSRA version broadly matches the story referenced in the original post, some details are quite a bit different. It appears the purchaser - a Hispanic with a Texas driver's license - wasn't an illegal, but he was accompanied by one. The seller sold the gun to the person with a TX DL, who in turn passed it off to the illegal. The BATmen apparently considered this to be a "straw purchase" and things went downhill from there.

While it's not - quite - the outrage the linked story made it out to be, it still fairly reeks . . .

[sanglant]

up next, man who wouldn't sell gun to Mexican looking dude being charged with discrimination.

[AZRedhawk44]

up next, man who wouldn't sell gun to Mexican looking dude being charged with discrimination.

Lol.

I almost got into this situation awhile back.

I was at a gun show, trying to sell my Glock 21.  I just had a sign on my gun case, stating what it was, and how much I wanted.  Some guy with shorts halfway off his *expletive deleted*ss and white socks pulled up to his knees, and a So-Cal T-shirt came up and asked me to see it.  I took one look at him, and told him I'm only interested in selling to people with AZ Concealed Weapons Permits.

Oddly enough, he didn't have one.

It makes for a good way to stop a gun sale if you don't like the look of the purchaser.

I ended up selling to a soccer-dad looking guy, who did not have a CCW, but did show me a valid AZ driver's license and sign a paper for my own edification that he was a legitimate purchaser by all applicable state and federal laws.

I'm sure someone will be along to tell me what a racist bigot I am, but I'm pretty well convinced that my G21 would either be in Mexico or a police lock-up by this point had I sold to the first guy at the gun show.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

gun was yours you can sell not sell to whoever you like. i think you were smart to trust your gut.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

Wasn't me. I was selling 22mm assault rifles to the Mary Kay Cartel.

[GigaBuist]

I can't find any sort of court record for this, so I'm just guessing, but I suspect if we ever found out the details we'll see him being convicted for dealing without a license.

My gut feeling is this wasn't a guy that sold a handgun out of his collection every six months.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

and the jury didn't buy it about him not knowing that the guy he sold to wasn't a straw purchaser.  didn't help that the stf witnessed the handoff at the show.  i mean come on 3 guys come by one trys to buy and you turn him down cause hes not legit  they walk around a while and the one of his buds buys your gun and you are gonna try to sell the idea that "golly i had no idea!"

[sanglant]

and the jury didn't buy it about him not knowing that the guy he sold to wasn't a straw purchaser.  didn't help that the stf witnessed the handoff at the show.  i mean come on 3 guys come by one trys to buy and you turn him down cause hes not legit  they walk around a while and the one of his buds buys your gun and you are gonna try to sell the idea that "golly i had no idea!"

i nominate this as the best typo this month.

[MechAg94]

and the jury didn't buy it about him not knowing that the guy he sold to wasn't a straw purchaser.  didn't help that the stf witnessed the handoff at the show.  i mean come on 3 guys come by one trys to buy and you turn him down cause hes not legit  they walk around a while and the one of his buds buys your gun and you are gonna try to sell the idea that "golly i had no idea!"

I understand you point, but really hate to see the seller punished with prison for something like that.  It wasn't like he sold it without ID or something.  I guess the jury didn't believe him though.  I'm a little curious about the jury instructions and the case in general though.  

Given the comments above, were the buyers convicted?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

hard to say  the "liberty site" got almost everything else besides the sellers name wrong so they have zip credibility

[MechAg94]

Most especially if the buyers were not brought to trial, the seller shouldn't be put on trial either.

[MechAg94]

A different article and final thought on this case. 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/09/texas-gun-dealer-gets-prison-sentence-selling-gun-illegal-immigrant-id-illegal/

A:  We have an illegal alien who knew he was prohibited and basically lied to straw purchase a gun. 
B:  We have a seller who may or may not have known he was selling to a buyer who was prohibited. 

What does the federal prosecutor do?  He declines to prosecute A, and gets A (who knowingly broke the law) to testify against B. 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

"Agents witnessed the Defendant (Copeland) negotiate a price for a handgun with Hipolito Aviles, who then handed cash to a second Hispanic male, who then handed Aviles' cash and his own identification to the defendant," the prosecution said in court documents.

"The Defendant in turn sold the firearm and handed it to the 'straw' purchaser, who then handed the firearm to Hipolito Aviles. The Defendant then instructed Mr. Aviles to hand the firearm back to the straw purchaser because he had 'bought' the firearm. Agents witnessed the straw purchaser hand the firearm back to Hipolito Aviles a short time later."

Aviles, the undocumented immigrant, was charged with possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, served a little over six months in prison and was deported on July 8, U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman Daryl Fields said. 



couple that with the tsra member who witnessed this and we have a case 

https://www.tsra.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=256:casualty-of-the-austin-gun-show-chaos&catid=55:tripp-talk&Itemid=113

[MechAg94]

That is why I said the guy "may or may not" have known.  I am not completely convinced he didn't know.  I would be curious if there was anything else brought up at trial to show that.

The statement from the prosecutor is highly simplified and makes it seem like all the events happened in 30 seconds.  Another thing that wasn't clear (or I missed it) was the time frame involved.  

[MechAg94]

Aviles, the undocumented immigrant, was charged with possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, served a little over six months in prison and was deported on July 8, U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman Daryl Fields said.  [/i]

Is 6 months normal for an illegal weapons charge? 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

not sure in texas in dc it is

[MechAg94]

"Apparently, Huerta was not charged because he was a witness," ATF spokeswoman Franceska Perot told FoxNews.com, adding that the bureau referred the case to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE spokeswoman Gail Montenegro said there was no record of Huerta in ICE's system, indicating that there is no effort underway to deport him.

Perot said that, to her understanding, Huerta wasn't arrested at the gun show because agents there felt "he was just a go-between for Aviles." She said she couldn't say specifically why the decision was made not to prosecute him later, other than to say that situations like this happen all the time.

If I am reading this right, they arrested and eventually deported the eventual buyer, but the straw purchaser was never even arrested.  I guess being a "go-between" straw purchaser is not something the ATF is even bothering with these days. 

Nice to know that people can relax about that question of buying a gun for a gift.   

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i think the seller stepped in it when in spite of being told the new rules for sales there and knowing that the show was under extra scrutiny he decided to make the sale after they trolled by 3 times. apparently a jury didn't buy it.  another smart move finished  a man off

[HankB]

i think the seller stepped in it when in spite of being told the new rules for sales there and knowing that the show was under extra scrutiny he decided to make the sale after they trolled by 3 times. apparently a jury didn't buy it.  another smart move finished  a man off

Rules imposed by the promoter are not laws. The man was charged with a law violation, not a rule violaton.

And while IANAL and my knowledge of the case is incomplete, the very nature of the charge, its prosecution, and the apparent lack of interest in prosecuting the actual buyer who actually handed the gun over to an illegal make the government's role in the entire matter look - to put it mildly - questionable.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

The man was charged with a law violation, not a rule violaton.



and a jury looked at the case and all the facts, including the ones the mans lawyer presented, and convicted him.

did you read the tsra piece?

[HankB]

The point being made was that the rule violation you mentioned earlier was irrelevant.

As for the verdict . . . juries can be greatly influenced by judges' instructions and the conduct of the trial, and can wrongly convict just as they can wrongly acquit. WHY they decided to convict in this case is speculation - perhaps they weren't informed that the guy who actually made the purchase (and who had a TX DL) and actually passed the gun to the illegal wasn't prosecuted. Or maybe they just didn't care. Maybe the guy had a bad lawyer.

All speculation, none of which has any bearing on .gov's questionable (based on available information) pursuit of this matter.

did you read the tsra piece?

And who do you think linked the TSRA piece to this thread in the first place, and pointed out the situation wasn't quite as outrageous as portrayed in the blog referenced in the OP?