[quote Eugene]So either Haynes vs. U.S. does not apply as broadly as we think, or it has been superseded (or Mr. Wright had a bad lawyer).[/quote]
I think it might be that he didn’t have as good a lawyer as Haynes, or Mr. Wright’s lawyer was not paying attention. We have seen an example where in-attentiveness has happened.. Check the docket.. see the note saying “pro se.” next to Rober Lee Wright Jr’s name? This means that he was representing himself.
Petitioner was charged by information with violating 26 U.S.C. § 5851 (part of the National Firearms Act, an interrelated statutory system for the taxation of certain classes of firearms used principally by persons engaged in unlawful activities)
I italicized for emphasis.
ALSO from the decision:
A proper claim of the privilege against self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for failure to register under sec. 5841 or for possession of an unregistered firearm under sec. 5851.
Considering that the basis of the argument was: “That, because he was a convicted felon and thus prohibited from owning a firearm, requiring him to register was essentially requiring him to make an open admission to the government that he was in violation of the law, which was thus a violation of his right not to incriminate himself.”, and the Supreme Court essentially agreed, it is likely to extend past just the statute involved.. as do most Supreme Court decisions.
