D.C.

Criminal Code Reform Commission

441 Fourth Street, NW, Suite 1C001S, Washington, D.C. 20001
(202) 442-8715 www.ccrc.dc.gov

November 14, 2022

Council of the District of Columbia
1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20004

Dear Councilmembers,
I write to express gratitude on behalf of the Criminal Code Reform Commission (CCRC) for your
support of the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022 (RCCA) at first reading earlier this month.
I would also like to address a proposed amendment to the RCCA introduced by Councilmember
Pinto, which would increase the maximum penalties for two firearm possession offenses:
Possession of a Firearm by an Unauthorized Person and Carrying a Dangerous Weapon. The
CCRC recognizes that gun violence continues to inflict serious harm on our communities and
ensuring the safety of District residents is the Council’s highest priority. To this end, the RCCA
provides significant penalties for illegal firearm possession by relying on multiple offenses and
penalty enhancements to increase the maximum term of imprisonment proportionately as the
manner of the firearm possession becomes more dangerous.
To illustrate how the RCCA proportionately increases penalties based on the dangerousness of
firearms possession, please consider the following hypothetical situations. If a person with a prior
conviction for a crime of violence1 possesses a firearm in their closet, the person is guilty of First
Degree Possession of a Firearm by an Unauthorized Person, punishable by up to four years.2
Carrying a firearm outside the home without a license—which presents a greater risk of harm
compared to possessing the gun in the home—constitutes a separate offense, Second Degree
Carrying a Dangerous Weapon, punishable by up to two years.3 If the weapon is particularly
dangerous¾for example, if the firearm is a ghost gun¾this constitutes yet another offense, First

1
The term “crime of violence” captures nearly two dozen violent offenses, including murder, robbery, carjacking, and
kidnapping.
2
Second Degree Unauthorized Possession of a Firearm prohibits people from possessing firearms if the person is a
fugitive from justice, has a prior conviction for a felony offense within the last 10 years, a prior conviction for certain
intrafamily or weapons offenses within the last 5 years, or is subject to a final civil protection order anti-stalking order.
3
If the actor carries the weapon in a gun-free zone, the person is guilty of First Degree Carrying a Dangerous weapon,
punishable by four years.
Degree Possession of a Prohibited Weapon, punishable by up to four years.4 Under the RCCA,
these multiple offenses can apply in a single case, and judges have discretion to order that the
sentences be served consecutively.
Under this hypothetical situation, the RCCA authorizes up to 10 years’ incarceration for possession
of a firearm, even if it was never used or intended for use in a crime. If the person intends to use
or actually uses the firearm to commit a crime, the RCCA provides additional offenses and penalty
enhancements that further increase the range of penalties. For example, if a person with a prior
robbery conviction commits a robbery using a ghost gun that results in only minor injuries, the
RCCA authorizes up to 20 years’ incarceration. This 20-year maximum can be further increased
through use of general penalty enhancements, such as the repeat offender enhancement and the
pre-trial release enhancement.
By allowing multiple weapons offenses and penalty enhancements to apply to a single case, the
RCCA provides maximum penalties that—working together—proportionately reflect the
seriousness of firearm possession and are consistent with current sentencing practices. The
RCCA’s four-year maximums for Possession of a Firearm by an Unauthorized Person and
Possession of a Prohibited Weapon, and the two-year maximum for Carrying a Dangerous
Weapon, are higher than the vast majority of sentences issued by judges for the analogous offenses
under current law.5
The proposed amendment to increase the penalty classification for weapons offenses, while well
intended, diverges from the penalty recommendations approved by the CCRC’s Advisory Group,
which were the product of years of consideration and intended to create a proportionate system of
penalties. Ad hoc changes to weapons offense penalties could result in disproportionately severe
penalties as compared to other offenses in the RCCA. For example, if the penalty classification
for First Degree Possession of a Firearm by an Unauthorized Person were increased by one class,
this offense would be subject to the same penalties as Second Degree Assault, a serious violent
felony which includes inflicting life threatening, or permanently disfiguring injuries.
Changes to penalty classifications may result in longer sentences for firearm possession and could
exacerbate racial disparities in incarceration. Although it is likely that only a small percentage of
defendants would be sentenced to the increased maximum penalties, changing the penalty
classifications could result in an increase in the average sentence for these offenses. Increases in
the average sentence for these offenses would have a disproportionate effect on African American

4
Second Degree Possession of an Unauthorized Weapon bans possession of certain firearm accessories, such as
silencers, bump stocks, and large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and is punishable by up to 2 years.
5
D.C. Superior Court provided the CCRC with data on all adult criminal sentences imposed from 2010-2019.
According to this data, the median sentences for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm (with a prior crime of violence
conviction), Carrying a Dangerous Weapon, and Possession of a Prohibited Weapon were 3 years, 1 year, and 3
months respectively; and the 97.5th percentile sentences were 6 years, 32 months, and 21.6 months, respectively.

The 97.5th percentile sentences issued for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm and Carrying a Dangerous Weapon are
roughly 1-2 years higher than the maximum sentence authorized for the analogous offenses under the RCCA.
However, according to Court data, these offenses are frequently accompanied by convictions for other offenses, which
would authorize additional penalties under the RCCA. Only approximately 1% of all convictions for these offenses
were sentenced above the RCCA maximum without at least one additional accompanying conviction in the case.
defendants. According to D.C. Superior Court data from 2010-2019, roughly 95% to 98% of all
convictions for Possession of a Firearm by an Unauthorized Person6 and Carrying a Dangerous
weapon involved an African American defendant, some of the highest rates for any offense for
which data is available.
For the foregoing reasons, the CCRC recommends that the RCCA not be amended to increase the
penalty classifications for Possession of a Firearm by an Unauthorized Person and Carrying a
Dangerous weapon.
If you or your staff have any questions about the RCCA’s treatment of firearm possession, or any
other issuers relating to the bill, please do not hesitate to contact me. I understand these issues are
of the utmost importance, and the CCRC hopes that you will continue to support this important
and historic modernization of the District’s criminal code.

Sincerely,

Jinwoo Charles Park

Executive Director
D.C. Criminal Code Reform Commission

6
The analogous current offense is known labeled as “Unlawful Firearm Possession” in D.C. Superior Court’s data.