Mere possession of firearms without any malice or intent to harm is NOT considered CMT.  Simple gun possession is generally not a crime of moral turpitude, although it is a separate basis of deportation.

 

Matter of Rainford, 20 I. & N. Dec. 598 (BIA 1992). 

 

A noncitizen with a gun possession conviction may still be considered not to have Good Moral Character, however. 

 

            See Acevedo-Toscano v. INS, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20638 (9th Cir. 1994) (unpublished).

 

Possession of a sawed-off shotgun. 

 

Matter of Granados, 16 I. & N. Dec. 726 (BIA 1979) (conviction of possession of a concealed sawed-off shotgun is not a crime involving moral turpitude), criticized in Campos v. INS, 961 F.2d 309 (1st Cir. 1992).

 

Matter of Hernandez-Casillas, 20 I. & N. Dec. 262, 278 (BIA 1990, AG 1991), aff’d mem. sub nom. Hernandez-Casillas v. INS, 983 F.2d 231 (5th Cir. 1993) (Table), citing United States ex rel. Andreacchi v. Curran, 38 F.2d 498 (S.D.N.Y. 1926); Ex parte Saraceno, 182 Fed. 955 (S.D.N.Y. 1910);

Matter of Granados, 16 I. & N. Dec. 726 (BIA 1979).

 

            Firearms Licensing Fraud.

 

Ali v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 737 (7th Cir. Apr. 4, 2008) (conviction for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A), giving false statement regarding information required for firearms license, is a CMT where the pre-sentence report indicated an intent to defraud).  This is a poorly reasoned decision, which looked beyond the elements and the record of conviction to find the offense was a CMT.  See § 6.2(B), infra.

Other

CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE"FIREARMS"POSSESSION OF AN ASSAULT WEAPON
People v. Gabriel, 203 Cal.App.4th 199, 137 Cal.Rptr.3d 382 (2d Dist. Feb. 3, 2012) (California conviction of possession of an assault weapon, in violation of Penal Code 12280(b), constituted a crime of moral turpitude, for purposes of impeachment of a witness with that conviction; Defendant's conviction of this charge required, at the least, that he should have known the weapon possessed the characteristics that made it particularly dangerous to human life. ( 12280, subd. (b); see In re Jorge M., supra, 23 Cal.4th at p. 885, 98 Cal.Rptr.2d 466, 4 P.3d 297.) We thus conclude that under Castro's least adjudicated elements test, the mere possession of such a weapon demonstrates a general readiness to do evil. (Castro, supra, 38 Cal.3d at p. 315, 211 Cal.Rptr. 719, 696 P.2d 111.)).

CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE"POSSESSION OF A FIREARM BY AN UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT
Possession of a firearm, under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5), should not be considered to be a crime involving moral turpitude. Since possessing a firearm is not inherently evil and not malum prohibitum, the fact of being unlawfully undocumented when doing so should not make it a crime of moral turpitude. See Matter of Hernandez-Casillas, 20 I&N Dec. 262 (BIA 1990) (possessing a sawed-off shotgun not a crime of moral turpitude). See also Matter of Gabryelski, 20 I&N Dec. 750 (1993): [W]e point out that while the respondent's conviction for possession of a firearm establishes his deportability under section 241(a)(2)(C) of the Act, see Matter of Chow, Interim Decision 3199 (BIA 1993), it does not render him inadmissible for purposes of section 245 adjustment, as there is no corresponding exclusion ground. In Matter of Rainford, supra, the Board specifically held that a conviction for criminal possession of weapon did not preclude a finding of admissibility in connection with an application for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act, because it is not a ground of excludability. (Ibid.) Since it is not a ground of inadmissibility, it is not a crime involving moral turpitude. Thanks to Jonathan Moore.