The Pennsylvania State Police must investigate whether a criminal conviction specifically warrants a denial of gun ownership, rather than automatically barring ownership based on a conviction, the state Supreme Court has ruled.

The justices unanimously affirmed a Commonwealth Court ruling that an administrative law judge of the state Attorney General's Office improperly denied plaintiff Richard Navarro's application for return of a firearm without showing that the weapon was involved in interstate or foreign commerce.

In November 2013, Navarro pleaded guilty to two first-degree misdemeanor counts related to forging prescriptions and was sentenced to two years' probation. In October 2016, Navarro submitted an application for return of a stolen firearm and was denied after a Pennsylvania Instant Check System report, which listed him as disqualified based on his 2013 convictions.

When Navarro challenged the decision, he was informed in a letter from the Pennsylvania State Police that his application had been denied pursuant to Section 922(g) of the federal Gun Control Act (GCA). Navarro appealed and, in 2017, an ALJ, agreeing with the PSP's decision, denied his application.

The Commonwealth Court held the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act (PUFA) requires the PSP to determine whether a potential purchaser or transferee of a firearm has a criminal history that disqualifies them under state or federal law. Triggering of Section 922(g) of the GCA, meanwhile, requires proof of two things: (1) a disqualifying conviction, and (2) that the firearm at issue was involved in interstate or foreign commerce.

According to Justice Kevin Dougherty's June 17 opinion, the information upon which the state police relied did not paint the full picture of Navarro's circumstances.

“PSP clearly presented 'accurate' record information to the extent it included a conviction for a crime punishable by up to five years' imprisonment,” Dougherty said. “However, the information was incomplete to the extent it failed to show the firearm in question moved in interstate or foreign commerce, a required element of the prohibition under federal law on which PSP relied.

“As the Commonwealth Court here properly found, the federal prohibition of Section 922(g) simply cannot apply absent some proof the firearm at issue moved in interstate or foreign commerce. We agree with the panel's conclusion the evidence relating to such commerce need not be extensive and may be satisfied by showing the gun was manufactured outside Pennsylvania (or that the gun otherwise crossed state lines).”

The Pennsylvania State Police did not respond to a request for comment.

Navarro, who represents himself, did not return a call seeking comment.