🔹 Key Federal Statutes Governing Firearm Sales

1. 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(1)(A): Engaging in the Business Without a License

This statute makes it unlawful for any person, except a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms. Violators can face up to five years in federal prison and fines up to $250,000.

2. 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6): False Statements During Firearm Transactions

It is illegal to knowingly make false statements or present false identification when purchasing a firearm. This includes providing inaccurate information on ATF Form 4473. Convictions can result in up to ten years of imprisonment

3. 18 U.S.C. § 922(d): Sale to Prohibited Persons

Selling firearms to individuals prohibited from possessing them—such as felons, fugitives, or those with certain mental health conditions—is a federal offense. Penalties can include up to ten years in prison.

4. 18 U.S.C. § 922(k): Possession of Firearms with Altered Serial Numbers

Possessing, transporting, or receiving firearms with removed or altered serial numbers is prohibited. Violators may face up to five years of imprisonment.

5. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c): Use of Firearm in Relation to a Crime

Using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime carries mandatory minimum sentences:

• 5 years for possession
• 7 years if the firearm is brandished
• 10 years if discharged

These sentences run consecutively to any other sentence imposed.

🔹 Penalties and Sentencing Enhancements

Penalties for illegal firearm sales can be severe, especially when combined with other criminal activities:

• Felon in Possession (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)): Up to 10 years in prison.
• Straw Purchases (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)): Up to 10 years in prison.
• Sale of Illegal Firearms: Up to 10 years in prison.

Mandatory minimum sentences apply in cases involving crimes of violence or drug trafficking.

🔹 Real-World Example: Unlicensed Firearm Manufacturing

In a notable case, Nicholas DeFelice of Montville, Connecticut, was sentenced to over a year in federal prison for illegally manufacturing and selling firearms without a license. Operating under “DeFelice Defense,” he produced and distributed over 200 firearms. An ATF investigation revealed he sold a custom-made firearm to undercover agents. A search of his residence uncovered numerous unregistered firearms and accessories. CT Insider

🔹 Conclusion

Federal laws strictly regulate the sale and distribution of firearms to ensure public safety. Engaging in unlicensed sales, making false statements during transactions, or selling to prohibited individuals can lead to significant legal consequences, including substantial fines and lengthy imprisonment. Compliance with federal firearm regulations is essential for all individuals and entities involved in firearm transactions.

Matthew Galluzzo is a former Manhattan prosecutor and experienced federal criminal defense attorney. He has successfully represented many people investigated for and accused of federal firearms offenses. If you or a loved one have been accused in New York or Connecticut federal court of unlawfully selling firearms, you should strongly consider engaging Matthew Galluzzo.

an unserialized “ghost gun” seized from a client

🛠️ Defining Ghost Guns and Unserialized Components

Under New York law, a “ghost gun” refers to an unserialized firearm, including both completed and unfinished frames or receivers. An “unfinished frame or receiver” is defined as any material that has been shaped or formed for the purpose of becoming the frame or receiver of a firearm and which may readily be made into a functional frame or receiver through milling, drilling, or other means. 

⚖️ Key Statutes and Offenses

1. Criminal Sale of a Ghost Gun in the Second Degree (Penal Law § 265.60)

• Offense: Knowingly selling, exchanging, giving, or disposing of a ghost gun to another person.
• Exceptions: Not applicable if the individual voluntarily surrenders the ghost gun to law enforcement or, within six months, disposes of it to a licensed gunsmith.
• Penalty: Class E felony.  

2. Criminal Sale of a Ghost Gun in the First Degree (Penal Law § 265.61)

• Offense: Selling, exchanging, giving, or disposing of ten or more ghost guns to another person.
• Exceptions: Similar to the second-degree offense, including voluntary surrender or transfer to a licensed gunsmith within six months.
• Penalty: Class D felony.

3. Criminal Possession of an Undetectable Firearm (Penal Law § 265.01(9))

• Offense: Knowingly possessing a firearm that is not detectable by metal detectors or X-ray machines.
• Penalty: Class D felony. 

🛡️ Legislative Background

In 2021, New York enacted the Jose Webster Untraceable Firearms Act and the Scott J. Beigel Unfinished Receiver Act, which collectively prohibit the possession and sale of ghost guns and their components. These laws also require gunsmiths and dealers to register firearms and unfinished frames or receivers they assemble. 

📌 Enforcement and Legal Precedents

In March 2024, New York Attorney General Letitia James secured a $7.8 million judgment against Florida-based retailer Indie Guns for illegally selling ghost gun components in New York. The company was permanently banned from selling such parts in the state.

Additionally, in December 2024, Congressman Ritchie Torres called on Governor Kathy Hochul to close loopholes in New York’s ghost gun laws, particularly concerning the manufacturing of 3D-printed ghost guns, following a high-profile murder involving such a weapon.

📝 Conclusion

New York’s stringent laws aim to curb the proliferation of ghost guns and enhance public safety. Individuals found in violation of these statutes face serious legal consequences, including felony charges and significant penalties. The state’s proactive approach underscores its commitment to addressing the challenges posed by untraceable firearms. Of course, the possession or sale or use of ghost guns can also be prosecuted in federal courts by federal prosecutors under federal law, too.

Matthew Galluzzo is a former Manhattan prosecutor and experienced criminal defense attorney who has successfully defended and represented people arrested for the possession of ghost guns. If you or a loved one have been arrested for this offense in the New York City area, you should strongly consider engaging Matthew Galluzzo to be your attorney.

Though the client had a license to lawfully own and carry his firearm in his home state of Georgia, that right does not apply in New York. As such, his license was not, strictly speaking, a defense to the charges in New York. Nevertheless, Mr. Galluzzo successfully persuaded Queens prosecutors that the client had no malicious intent in bringing the firearm to New York, and that his possession of it in LaGuardia was attributable only to his mistaken assumption that his license permitted him to bring it to New York. Mr. Galluzzo further provided evidence of the client’s status as a scholarship student-athlete, his record of community service, and his good character. The prosecutors reviewed Mr. Galluzzo’s written submission and ultimately agreed to dismiss the felony and misdemeanor charges. The client was allowed to plead guilty to a non-criminal violation with a $120 fine, meaning that the client will have no public criminal record and can lawfully say that he has never been convicted of a crime.

Every years, hundreds of people are arrested in New York area airports for bringing otherwise-lawful firearms into the city. If you or a loved one have been arrested for that offense, you should strongly consider contacting Mr. Galluzzo. Mr. Galluzzo has successfully represented many people accused of having weapons at the airport with a strong record of success. As a former New York City prosecutor himself, he knows how to best persuade prosecutors to show leniency and decline to pursue felony charges against generally law-abiding people.

The plain clothes police officers approach the car and ask everyone to step out. One of the officers flashes a light into the interior of the car and sees the reflection of a silver object under the front passenger seat. Without asking a question, he reaches under the seat and retrieves a silver handgun, which he determines to be loaded

Question: How do the police officers determine who to arrest? The answer is easy – they arrest everyone. Alex, Brian, Chris, and you are all jointly charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree in violation of Penal Law 265.03(1)(b), which is a class “C” felony, and which carries a maximum of 15 years in jail.

What is the police officers’ authority to do this? The answer is the “gun presumption” or “car presumption,” which allows the police to charge everyone in the car with possessing that one gun pursuant to statute. Penal Law 265.15 states as follows: “The presence in an automobile…of any firearm…is presumptive evidence of its possession by all persons occupying such automobile at the time such weapon…is found.” The statute goes on to exclude the following scenarios:

“Except: (a) if such weapon…is found upon the person of one of the occupants therein;

(b) if such weapon…is found in an automobile which is being operated for hire by a duly licensed driver in the due, lawful and proper pursuit of his or her trade, then such presumption shall not apply to the driver;

(c) if the weapon so found is a pistol or revolver and one of the occupants, not present under duress, has in his or her possession a valid license to have and carry concealed the same.

In other words, if an unlicensed gun is found in a vehicle and not on the person of one of the passengers (e.g., in their waistband), any and all occupants (except a duly licensed hired driver) will be charged with possessing that one gun. The fact that one gun can be “possessed” by more than one person may seem contrary to logic, but the law distinguishes between “possessing” something and owning it. In order to possess something you simply have to exercise “dominion or control” over it…i.e., be able to pick it up, kick it, use it, or hide it. There is no numerical limit on how many people may possess something.

This is a common theme in New York gun possession: even though the gun was “Brian’s,” the police never observed it on him – arguably they’d be eyeing you with more fervor as the owner since it was at your feet when the car was stopped. In any event, EVERY passenger in the case would be facing serious felony charges.

If you or someone you know has been arrested and charged with possessing a gun in a car, or any weapon for that matter, you need to hire an experienced criminal lawyer. Some jurisdictions such as Manhattan have very strict gun enforcement practices and recommend state prison in practically every gun case. Obviously, it is not a matter to take lightly, and it is a must to have an attorney who will defend you in such a situation.

“NEW YORK CRIMINAL LAWYERS ON DEFENDING POSSESSION OF A GUN IN A CAR”

The common-sense explanation notwithstanding, Article 265 of the New York Penal Law defines a loaded firearm as follows:

“Loaded firearm” means any firearm loaded with ammunition or any firearm which is possessed by one who, at the same time, possesses a quantity of ammunition which may be used to discharge such firearm.

Thus, in People v. Tillery, 60 A.D.3d 1203 (3d Dep’t 2009), the defendant’s criminal possession of a weapon charge was upheld where the police arrested defendant with an “un”-loaded shotgun in his vehicle, but five shells in his pocket. The moral of the story is that when it comes to gun and weapons-possessions cases in general, the law may not seem to comport with common-sense definitions. If you have been arrested for or charged with a weapons possession offense, you need to consult withcompetent criminal defense attorneys with knowledge of the New York Penal Law and its nuances.

NYC Administration Code § 10-133 prohibits the possession of the two main types of knives. First, subdivision (b) makes it illegal to carry a knife with a blade length of four inches or more. Obviously, the average chef’s knife has a blade that long, as do many folding knives used for hunting or fishing. Fortunately, subdivision (b) does permit you to carry such a knife “to or from a place where it is used for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, picnicking or any employment, trade or occupation customarily requiring the use of such knife.” In our experience, though, police officers are frequently not persuaded by the explanation that the knife is used at work to open boxes, and will issue a ticket anyway. You can also avoid a conviction for this violation if you can show that the knife “is being transported directly to or from a place of purchase, sharpening or repair, packaged in such a manner as not to allow easy access to such knife while it is transported”. So, if you just bought a long kitchen knife from Bed Bath & Beyond, you can safely take it home so long as it remains in the package. There are various other exceptions for the four-inch blade rule that are rarely applied (see below).

But even knives with blades shorter than four inches can still get you in trouble if they are publicly displayed or worn. Subdivision (c) of NYC A.C. § 10-133 makes it illegal “for any person in a public place, street or park, to wear outside of his or her clothing or carry in open view any knife with an exposed or unexposed blade unless such person is actually using such knife for a lawful purpose as set forth in subdivision d of this section.” Basically, this means that should not carry your clip-on knife like this person.

If you have any more questions about these issues, call the experienced criminal defense attorneys at the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. They routinely represent people in summons matters throughout the city, and have had great success defending people charged with a variety of weapons crimes and violations.

The full text of the statute is below:
New York City Administrative Code Section 10-133

a. Legislative findings. It is hereby declared and found that the possession in public places, streets and parks of the city, of large knives is a menace to the public health, peace, safety and welfare of the people of the city; that the possession in public places, streets and parks of such knives has resulted in the commission of many homicides, robberies, maimings and assaults of and upon the people of the city; that this condition encourages and fosters the commission of crimes, and contributes to juvenile delinquency, youth crime and gangsterism; that unless the possession or carrying in public places, streets and parks of the city of such knives without a lawful purpose is prohibited, there is danger of an increase in crimes of violence and other conditions detrimental to public peace, safety and welfare. It is further declared and found that the wearing or carrying of knives in open view in public places while such knives are not being used for a lawful purpose is unnecessary and threatening to the public and should be prohibited. b. It shall be unlawful for any person to carry on his or her person or have in such person’s possession, in any public place, street, or park any knife which has a blade length of four inches or more. c. It shall be unlawful for any person in a public place, street or park, to wear outside of his or her clothing or carry in open view any knife with an exposed or unexposed blade unless such person is actually using such knife for a lawful purpose as set forth in subdivision d of this section. d. The provisions of subdivisions b and c of this section shall not apply to (1) persons in the military service of the state of New York when duly authorized to carry or display knives pursuant to regulations issued by the chief of staff to the governor; (2) police officers and peace officers as defined in the criminal procedure law; (3) participants in special events when authorized by the police commissioner; (4) persons in the military or other service of the United States, in pursuit of official duty authorized by federal law; (5) emergency medical technicians or voluntary or paid ambulance drivers while engaged in the performance of their duties; or (6) any person displaying or in possession of a knife otherwise in violation of this section when such knife (a) is being used for or transported immediately to or from a place where it is used for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, picnicking or any employment, trade or occupation customarily requiring the use of such knife; or (b) is displayed or carried by a member of a theatrical group, drill team, military or para-military unit or veterans organization, to, from, or during a meeting, parade or other performance or practice for such event, which customarily requires the carrying of such knife; or (c) is being transported directly to or from a place of purchase, sharpening or repair, packaged in such a manner as not to allow easy access to such knife while it is transported; or (d) is displayed or carried by a duly enrolled member of the Boy or Girl Scouts of America or a similar organization or society and such display or possession is necessary to participate in the activities of such organization or society. e. Violation of this section shall be an offense punishable by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars or by imprisonment not exceeding fifteen days or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Generally, assuming that you were in fact in knowing possession of an unlicensed and loaded handgun, there are two main considerations for whether you will be charged with this Class C violent felony. First: the location of the possession. If you knowingly possessed the unlicensed and loaded firearm outside of your home or place of business, then you probably are going to be charged with the crime (Penal Law 265.03) and your reasons for having the gun are irrelevant. So, it does you no good to claim, for example, that you only possessed the gun for protection. (In fact, an admission like this only helps the prosecutor further prove your knowing possession of the gun.) If, however, you knowingly possessed the unlicensed and loaded handgun in your home or place of business, then you are not guilty of this charge unless you possessed it with the intent to use it unlawfully against another. Put another way, your intent in possessing the loaded handgun is relevant when it is inside your home or place of business. So, if you knowingly possessed an unlicensed and loaded handgun in your home, you may only be guilty of a misdemeanor (it would depend on your criminal record in that case). On the other hand, if a man threatens his wife with a loaded handgun inside his home, he could be charged with a violation of Penal Law Section 265.03(1), among other things. Keep in mind, though, that Penal Law Section 265.15 provides that knowing possession of a firearm is by itself presumptive evidence of possession with the intent to use it unlawfully against another; this effectively means that a defendant has to prove that he had innocent reasons for possessing the gun.

If you or a loved one have been charged with a violation of Penal Law 265.03 (Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree) and need representation, consider contacting experienced criminal defense attorneys who have successfully represented numerous people charged with this crime and are prepared to assist you as well.

The full text of a relevant handgun provision is as follows:

§ 265.03 Criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree when: (1) with intent to use the same unlawfully against another, such person: (a) possesses a machine-gun; or (b) possesses a loaded firearm; or (c) possesses a disguised gun; or (2) such person possesses five or more firearms; or (3) such person possesses any loaded firearm. Such possession shall not, except as provided in subdivision one or seven of section 265.02 of this article, constitute a violation of this subdivision if such possession takes place in such person’s home or place of business. Criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree is a class C felony.

At trial, Galluzzo conceded the facts of the arrest and that the defendant possessed the knife in question. The defense employed was simple, yet effective: the knife was not a switchblade.

Penal Law section 265.01 reads as follows:

§ 265.01 Criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree when: (1) He or she possesses any firearm, electronic dart gun, electronic stun gun, gravity knife, switchblade knife, pilum ballistic knife, metal knuckle knife, cane sword, billy, blackjack, bludgeon, plastic knuckles, metal knuckles, chuka stick, sand bag, sandclub, wrist-brace type slingshot or slungshot, shirken or “Kung Fu star”

The definition of switchblade is contained in Penal Law section 265.00(4).

4. “Switchblade knife” means any knife which has a blade which opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device in the handle of the knife.

Thus, in order to prove the defendant’s guilt of possessing a switchblade, the People had to prove that the knife recovered from the defendant was a “switchblade,” as set forth in the charging documents. The defense challenged the prosecution’s characterization of the knife in question as a switchblade from the outset. In his opening statement, Galluzzo asserted that “Every knife has two parts, a blade and a handle. And this button or notch . . . is, in fact on the blade. So when you’re opening this knife, you’ll see what you’re really pushing on is the blade and not he button on the handle.”

The arresting officer testified as to the details of the arrest, and reported to the jury that the defendant told him that he carried the knife for his protection, since he could not legally carry a gun. The officer testified that the defendant acted in a cool, calm and collected manner in dealing with the officers, and that he “gently” handed the knife over when asked to do so. The defense asked the arresting officer a series of questions about the location of the button on the knife, including the following:

Q: But the button is basically on the back of the blade itself so as the blade moves, the button is moving too?

A: Correct.

Later, when the arresting officer’s partner testified on cross-examination, the following colloquy took place:

Q: Now that little notch without opening it, that little notch on the knife that you are pushing, that’s made out of metal, right?

A: Yes.

Q: And it’s the same metal that the blade is made out of or appears to be, right?

A: Yes.

Q: And, in fact, that little notch is actually attached to the back of the blade, correct?

A: That’s correct.

Q: And that little notch because it’s attached to the blade swings to the other side of the knife when the knife pops open; right?

A: That’s correct.

Q: And then when you close the knife back up, that little notch that’s attached to the blade swings back through the handle of the knife back into the back where it is now, right?

A: That’s correct.

Later, in summation, Galluzzo highlighted the confusing nature of the statute in question:

“You know what, it seems almost absurd that we’re here. Why can’t someone just tell us whether this things is a switchblade or not. The legislature was supposed to tell us But, unfortunately, once again, we have been failed by our State legislature because we’ve been given a statute that’s poorly written and does not make clear what is and what is not a switchblade. As a result, people are getting arrested for possessing knives that they don’t realize are illegal, and you’re being brought here and forced to sit through a trial to sort this whole mess out.”

The defense went on to discuss the knife itself:

“You could see if you look up close at the knife that it’s all one piece of metal, that blade, and that blade has a sharp side and on the back it has this little notch sticking out. So are you pushing a button or device in the handle? No, you’re pushing the blade when you’re opening up the knife.” Galluzzo also challenged the characterization of the mechanism on the knife as a ‘button’: “You could compare that where — to what you think is a classic switchblade you may have seen in old movies like West Side Story, Twelve Angry Men or Rebel Without a Cause . . . where it’s the switchblades that people have. Maybe you’ve seen one in real life or maybe on TV, you would think of a long thin handle and right in the middle of that long thin handle, there is a button, a button you have to depress like on a computer keyboard, press that button in the middle of the handle and out pops the long, thin blade that’s about the same length as the handle itself . . . . That’s the kind of button that this statute is [] talking about. This is not a button that you’re actually pushing. What you’re actually pushing, again, is the blade itself.”

The jury presumably agreed with the defense’s interpretation of the statute, and returned a not guilty verdict.