(a) No person shall remove, deface, alter or obliterate the name of any maker or model or any maker's number, unique serial number or other mark of identification on any firearm as defined in section
53a-3. The possession of any firearm upon which any identifying mark, number or name has been removed, defaced, altered or obliterated shall be prima facie evidence that the person owning or in possession of such firearm has removed, defaced, altered or obliterated the same.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class C felony for which two years of the sentence imposed may not be suspended or reduced by the court, and five thousand dollars of the fine imposed may not be remitted or reduced by the court unless the court states on the record its reasons for remitting or reducing such fine, and any firearm found in the possession of any person in violation of said provision shall be forfeited.
(1949 Rev., S. 4167; P.A. 97-56, S. 1; P.A. 13-3, S. 49; P.A. 19-6, S. 1.)
History: P.A. 97-56 designated existing provisions as Subsec. (a), amended said Subsec. (a) to replace “pistol or revolver” with “firearm” and include defacing an identifying mark, number or name as a prohibited act and added Subsec. (b) re the penalty for a violation, revising the penalty formerly located in Sec. 29-37(a) to include all firearms; P.A. 13-3 amended Subsec. (b) to change penalty from fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment of not more than 5 years to a class C felony for which 2 years of the sentence imposed may not be suspended or reduced and $5,000 of the fine may not be remitted or reduced unless the court states its reasons on the record; P.A. 19-6 added reference to unique serial number in Subsec. (a).
Cited. 193 C. 7; 237 C. 348.
Cited. 9 CA 169; judgment reversed, see 205 C. 370; 19 CA 51; 42 CA 768. Possession of weapon on which the identification mark has been altered or obliterated is prima facie evidence that the person in possession of weapon altered or obliterated the identification number; further, statute does not, by its language, limit application of the inference to situations in which accused is in actual possession of a pistol. 70 CA 232.
Subsec. (a):
Provision re possession as prima facie evidence of alteration is permissive inference, not mandatory presumption. 246 C. 339.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
29
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case:
State v. Francis, 717 A.2d 696 (Conn. 1998).
State v. Francis, 717 A.2d 696 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 17× “The defendant, Kermit Francis, was convicted by a jury of murder in violation of General *341 Statutes § 53a-54a (a), 1 carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of General Statutes § 29-35, 2 and altering or removing an identification mark on a pistol in violation of…”
State v. Turner, 771 A.2d 206 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 12× “to 1997) § 29-36 3 and interfering with an *379 officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a (a).”
State v. Duncan, 901 A.2d 687 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 6× “The defendant, Timothy Duncan, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 and 53a-134 (a) (2), interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes §…”
State v. Barlow, 797 A.2d 605 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 7× “wing a juiy trial, of criminal attempt to commit murder in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-49 (a) (2) 1 and 53a-54a, 2 conspiracy to commit murder in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 (a) 3 and 53a-54a, two counts of assault in the first degree in violation of General…”
State v. Carpenter, 562 A.2d 35 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989).
· cites it 5× “Deli on February 25, 1986; and (6) burglary in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-103, larceny in the third degree in vio *51 lation of General Statutes § 53a-124, stealing a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-212, and altering or removing an…”
State v. Strickland, 682 A.2d 521 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996).
· cites it 7× “The trial court further found that the defendant had been carrying a *772 pistol or revolver without a permit in violation of General Statutes § 29-35 (a), 1 had obliterated the identification number on a pistol or revolver in violation of General Statutes § 29-36 2 and had been…”
State v. Hair, 792 A.2d 179 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 3× “to 1999) § 53a-217 and (3) illegal alteration of a firearm identification mark in violation of General Statutes § 29-36. Prior to trial, the defendant filed a motion to sever the murder charge from the weapons charges on the ground that the weapons charges were unrelated to the…”
State v. Davis, 155 A.3d 221 (Conn. 2017).
“to 2011) § 29-36, unlawfully carrying a weapon in a vehicle in violation of § 29-38, criminal attempt to assault a police officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-49 (a) (2), reckless endangerment in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-63, interfering…”
State v. Strickland, 703 A.2d 109 (Conn. 1997).
· cites it 2× “at the state had proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence that the defendant had violated the conditions of his probation by failing to report as directed to his probation officer on the dates alleged, carrying a pistol or revolver without a permit in violation of General…”
Barlow v. Comm'r of Corr., 142 A.3d 290 (Conn. App. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 2× “In 1998, following a jury trial, the petitioner was convicted of attempt to commit murder in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-49 (a)(2) and 53a-54a, conspiracy to commit murder in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 (a) and 53a-54a, two counts of assault in the first…”
State v. Collazo, 967 A.2d 597 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 2× “The jury found the defendant guilty of criminal possession of a firearm and criminal possession of a sawed-off shotgun and not guilty of alteration of a firearm identification number in violation of General Statutes § 29-36. The court declared a mistrial as to both charges of…”
State v. Gerardi, 677 A.2d 937 (Conn. 1996).
· cites it 2× “3 The defendant was charged in an amended information with possession of a machine gun for an offensive or aggressive purpose in violation of § 53-202 (c), knowingly having a weapon in a vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 29-38, altering or removing an identification…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.