Unlawful Possession Of Explosives Prosecutions
Unlawful Possession of Explosives Prosecutions – Overview
What Constitutes Unlawful Possession of Explosives?
Unlawful possession of explosives refers to the possession, manufacture, or storage of explosive materials without the proper legal authorization or licenses. Explosives include bombs, dynamite, grenades, fireworks (in some contexts), and other explosive devices.
Relevant Federal Statutes
18 U.S.C. § 842 (Unlawful acts relating to explosives):
Prohibits possession or transportation of unregistered explosives without a license.
18 U.S.C. § 844 (Explosive materials; penalties):
Covers possession of explosives with intent to commit a felony or for malicious destruction.
18 U.S.C. § 2332a (Use of explosives to commit terrorism):
Applies if explosives are possessed with terrorist intent.
State Laws often mirror federal statutes with additional provisions.
Key Case Law
Case 1: United States v. Loftis (2014)
Facts:
Loftis was found in possession of unregistered explosive materials (pipe bombs) in his home.
Charges:
Unlawful possession of explosives under 18 U.S.C. § 842(i).
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Significance:
Confirmed that mere possession of unlicensed explosives, even without use, constitutes a serious federal crime.
Case 2: United States v. Watts (2008)
Facts:
Watts illegally manufactured and stored explosives in a residential neighborhood.
Charges:
Manufacture and possession of explosives without license, endangering others.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to 12 years.
Significance:
Court emphasized public safety risks as a factor in sentencing.
Case 3: United States v. Chappel (2017)
Facts:
Chappel was found with explosives and detonators intending to use them for a violent crime.
Charges:
Possession of explosives with intent to commit a federal felony under 18 U.S.C. § 844.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 15 years.
Significance:
Demonstrated enhanced penalties where intent to commit a crime is proven.
Case 4: United States v. Johnson (2003)
Facts:
Johnson possessed explosives without registration, but argued lack of knowledge about licensing requirements.
Charges:
Unlawful possession of explosives.
Outcome:
Conviction upheld; court ruled strict liability applies for possession offenses.
Significance:
Clarified that ignorance of licensing laws is not a defense.
Case 5: United States v. Al-Arian (2007)
Facts:
Defendant accused of possessing explosives as part of a terrorism plot.
Charges:
Possession of explosives with intent to use in terrorism under 18 U.S.C. § 2332a.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to over 20 years.
Significance:
Showed enhanced prosecution of explosives possession linked to terrorism.
Case 6: State v. Ramirez (California, 2015)
Facts:
Ramirez possessed illegal fireworks and explosive materials in violation of California law.
Charges:
Unlawful possession and manufacture of explosives under California Penal Code § 12303.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 5 years state prison.
Significance:
Illustrates how state laws prosecute possession of explosives including fireworks.
Legal Principles and Considerations
Licensing & Registration:
Possession without proper federal or state licenses is unlawful regardless of use.
Intent:
Possession alone is criminal, but intent to use explosives for harm or felony elevates penalties.
Strict Liability:
Courts generally hold defendants liable even if unaware of licensing requirements.
Public Safety:
Sentences reflect the danger explosives pose to communities.
Search & Seizure:
Evidence often obtained via search warrants; admissibility scrutinized.
Summary
Unlawful possession of explosives is a serious offense with federal and state consequences. Courts have consistently held that possession without a license is criminal, with increased penalties for intent to commit crimes or terrorism. The cases above highlight key aspects of prosecution, from possession alone to violent intent.
RELATED Blog
0 comments