Garden of the Gods shooter charged with "carrying a large capacity magazine"

[.455_Hunter]

Please explain this to me.

Copeland allegedly had two guns and ammunition in his vehicle, according to police. He is charged with DUI, eluding arrest, reckless driving and endangerment, prohibited use of a weapon and carrying a large-capacity magazine.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/man-arrested-after-allegedly-firing-gun-in-garden-of-the-gods-running-from-police

[Gunner]

Yeah that one has me curious as well

[TFOGGER]

My guess: it's an add on charge for possession of a post-ban, larger than 15 round magazine. The prosecutor is kitchen sinking the guy to gain leverage for an eventual plea deal.

[Kraven251]

The high cap won't stick, there are about 100 ways around that, but the DUI and all the rest of it is more than enough to dick him over.

[newracer]

It is a poorly written sentence, each media outlet has it worded differently.

[Circuits]

It's illegal, prima facie, to possess a large (>15) capacity magazine in Colorado since 1 July 2013. Defense is proving possession before that date.

First time I've seen it actually charged, so far, but doesn't bode well for the future.

Our bulwark so far has been that about 95% of law enforcement agencies have pledged they will not enforce it, due to vagueness and unprovability, but apparently that's changing.

[CS1983]

It's illegal, prima facie, to possess a large (>15) capacity magazine in Colorado since 1 July 2013. Defense is proving possession before that date.

First time I've seen it actually charged, so far, but doesn't bode well for the future.

Our bulwark so far has been that about 95% of law enforcement agencies have pledged they will not enforce it, due to vagueness and unprovability, but apparently that's changing.

The Prosecution has to prove or Defense? How does one prove they bought something before a certain date? Seems the onus is on the prosecution, not the defense.

[ray1970]

"Burden of proof is on the prosecution"

At least that's what is written into the law.

[O2HeN2]

"Burden of proof is on the prosecution"

At least that's what is written into the law.

...and this is where plastic magazine mold dates will get you in trouble. One wonders what would happen with a metal magazine having a plastic follower with a date after 2013...

O2

[crays]

It's illegal, prima facie, to possess a large (>15) capacity magazine in Colorado since 1 July 2013. Defense is proving possession before that date.

First time I've seen it actually charged, so far, but doesn't bode well for the future.

Our bulwark so far has been that about 95% of law enforcement agencies have pledged they will not enforce it, due to vagueness and unprovability, but apparently that's changing.

The Prosecution has to prove or Defense? How does one prove they bought something before a certain date? Seems the onus is on the prosecution, not the defense.

I believe you misunderstood what Circuits meant. I believe he was saying that proof of possession is your best defense.