What is “Within Immediate Reach” for Firearms Reviewed by MN Supreme Court

Recently, the Minnesota Supreme Court reviewed the definition of what is “within immediate reach” for firearms in State v. Moore. Importantly, the evaluation is within the framework of aggravated first-degree controlled substance sale and possession offenses. In Moore, a handgun and drugs were found in a locked glove compartment on the front passenger side of the car Moore was driving. The traffic stop was initiated because of expired tabs (PSA: renew your tabs). The police officer testified at trial that the glove compartment was “within reach” of the driver’s seat. The jockeying on appeal was over whether “immediate reach” requires instant access.

As appellate courts like to do, they bust out dictionary definitions in its opinion. This time, referring to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (5th edition, in case you were wondering), Black’s Law Dictionary, and Webster’s Third International Dictionary from 2002. All three aligned with “instant” type terminology. Even so, in Moore, the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to adopt a bright-line definition that “within immediate reach” requires “instant access”. It worried that it would produce an absurd result by allowing people to bury guns at the bottom of backpacks, thereby not allowing someone to instantly grab the gun if they had to stifle through the belongings to get to it. Instead, the high court punted and determined “within immediate reach” is a factual question for judges and juries to figure out at trial. The court cited Stone in its determination, which also left a question of fact for the jury to decide whether disassembled and incomplete shotgun parts constitute a firearm.

Reviewing the facts from Moore, the supreme court determined the firearm locked in the front passenger glove compartment was within immediate reach of the driver. Judicial officers are increasingly taking hard stances on gun cases. While they may go through the intellectual exercise of statutory interpretation and review dictionary definitions, they are unlikely to disturb a finding of fact on a gun case, unless the determination at the lower courts was ridiculous. Judges often do not want to be seen as lenient on gun cases. You can sit in any courtroom across Minnesota today and you will assuredly hear multiple judges lecturing about protecting public safety regarding firearms. Right or wrong, it is happening.

Firearm offenses can carry serious mandatory minimum penalties, they can also make you ineligible to possess firearms and ammunition in the future. For a consultation at no charge, feel free to contact us by phone call or text: 612-547-3199 or email: ambroselegal@icloud.com.

Robert H. Ambrose is a criminal defense attorney and DWI lawyer in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Super Lawyers named him a Super Lawyer for the past three years and a Rising Star in the preceding six years. He has been an adjunct professor at the University of Minnesota Law School for the past seven years, and has over a decade of law school teaching experience. DWI Attorney Minneapolis MN, Criminal Defense Attorney Wisconsin, and Criminal Lawyer Minneapolis.