Commonwealth v. Ferrara: What It Means for Firearms Charges in Massachusetts
Firearms charges in Massachusetts are some of the most serious offenses a person can face. The penalties are steep, the laws are complex, and the fallout can last a lifetime. A recent decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in Commonwealth v. Erik A. Ferrara (SJC-13711, Aug. 26, 2025) highlights just how complicated these cases can be — and why having a skilled Brockton firearms charge defense lawyer is critical.
In this post, we’ll break down the Ferrara case, explain what it means for people accused of gun crimes in Massachusetts, and discuss how a strong defense can make all the difference.
The Ferrara Case: Background
On July 4, 2021, East Bridgewater police stopped a moped after observing two men riding without helmets. The operator, John Pena, had a suspended license and an outstanding warrant. His passenger was the defendant, Erik A. Ferrara. Neither man was legally licensed to drive the moped, so police arranged to have it towed.
Before the tow, Sergeant Antonio Ferreira performed an inventory search of the moped’s unlocked storage compartment. Inside, he found a backpack. Feeling something hard inside the bag, he suspected it was a gun. Upon opening it, he discovered a loaded handgun with its serial number removed, along with Ferrara’s Massachusetts ID and personal belongings.
Ferrara denied owning or knowing about the firearm, though he admitted to owning other items in the bag.
He was charged and convicted in Brockton District Court of:
Carrying a firearm without a license (G.L. c. 269, §10[a])
Carrying a loaded firearm without a license (G.L. c. 269, §10[n])
Defacement of a serial number on a firearm (G.L. c. 269, §11C)
On appeal, Ferrara challenged the search, the jury instructions, and the sufficiency of the evidence.
The Search Issue: Was the Inventory Search Legal?
Ferrara first argued that the gun should have been suppressed because police violated their inventory policy by deciding to impound the moped in the first place.
What the SJC Held
The Court disagreed. It ruled that the impoundment was justified because the moped could not be secured and was vulnerable to theft or vandalism. Massachusetts law permits impoundment when leaving a vehicle unattended poses a risk.
The Court also found no problem with the fact that one officer started the search and another finished it after the gun was found. The police department’s written policy allowed for transfer of responsibility.
Takeaway: Courts give police significant leeway in inventory searches tied to impoundments. Suppression is an uphill battle unless clear violations of policy exist.
The Licensing Burden: The Guardado Rule and Bruen
The more important issue in Ferrara’s case concerned licensing.
Historically, Massachusetts law treated the absence of a license as an affirmative defense — meaning the defendant had to raise it. That changed after two major cases:
Bruen (2022): The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects carrying firearms outside the home.
Guardado (2023): The SJC ruled that, after Bruen, the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant did not have a license to carry a firearm.
This meant that in cases pending after Bruen, juries had to be instructed that the prosecution bore the burden of proving lack of a license.
The Problem in Ferrara’s Trial
Ferrara’s jury was never told the Commonwealth had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he lacked a license. Instead, the trial followed the old rule.
The Commonwealth argued the mistake was harmless because Ferrara was a felon at the time and therefore ineligible for a license. But — crucially — they never introduced evidence of this fact at trial.
The SJC’s Decision
Because the jury was not properly instructed, and because no evidence established lack of a license, the SJC vacated Ferrara’s convictions for carrying a firearm and carrying a loaded firearm. He will now get a new trial on those charges.
Takeaway: In firearms prosecutions, the Commonwealth must now affirmatively prove lack of a license. If they don’t, convictions cannot stand.
The Defaced Serial Number Charge
Ferrara was also convicted of defacing a firearm’s serial number under G.L. c. 269, §11C.
The Law
The statute makes it illegal to:
Intentionally remove, alter, or obliterate a serial number, or
Knowingly possess a firearm with a defaced serial number.
Possession of such a firearm is prima facie evidence of a violation — but defendants can rebut it by showing lack of knowledge.
What Happened at Trial
The judge instructed the jury only on the intentional defacement theory — not on knowing possession. That meant the Commonwealth had to prove Ferrara himself defaced the gun.
The SJC’s Ruling
The Court found no evidence Ferrara actually removed or altered the serial number. Since the jury was not instructed on the “knowing possession” theory, the conviction had to be reversed outright. The Court ordered a judgment of not guilty on that charge.
Takeaway: When prosecutors overreach with the wrong theory, convictions can collapse. Careful jury instructions matter.
Why This Case Matters for People Charged With Firearms Offenses
The Ferrara decision is a reminder that firearms charges in Massachusetts are not always straightforward. Key lessons include:
The Commonwealth must prove no license. After Guardado and Bruen, prosecutors can’t assume defendants lacked an LTC. They need real evidence.
Inventory searches are tricky but challengeable. While the SJC upheld the search here, a sloppy or inconsistent inventory policy could lead to suppression.
Jury instructions are critical. If the jury is told the wrong legal standard, convictions may not stand.
Overcharging can backfire. By instructing only on intentional defacement, the Commonwealth lost the chance to convict on knowing possession.
For defendants in Brockton and Plymouth County, this case shows that convictions are not automatic — even when a firearm is found in a bag with your ID.
Penalties for Firearms Charges in Massachusetts
If convicted, firearms offenses carry heavy penalties:
Carrying a firearm without an LTC (§10[a]): Minimum 18 months, up to 5 years in state prison.
Carrying a loaded firearm without an LTC (§10[n]): Adds a minimum of 2.5 years, up to 10 years.
Defaced serial number (§11C): Up to 5 years in state prison or 2.5 years in the House of Correction.
Judges have little discretion to go below these mandatory minimums. That makes defense strategy critical.
Defending Firearms Charges in Brockton
Every case is different, but possible defenses include:
Challenging the search: Was the stop lawful? Was the impoundment justified? Was the inventory policy followed?
Lack of possession: Was the firearm really under your control, or was it someone else’s bag, car, or apartment?
Licensing: Did the Commonwealth prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you lacked an LTC?
Defaced firearms: Can they prove intentional defacement, or even knowledge of the serial number’s condition?
Reasonable doubt: Jurors must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. Conflicting testimony, lack of forensic evidence, or alternative explanations can create doubt.
The Stakes Are High
Firearms convictions do more than bring jail time:
They create a felony record that follows you for life.
They trigger a lifetime federal firearms ban.
They affect employment, immigration, and custody rights.
That’s why fighting these cases aggressively is so important.
Why You Need a Brockton Firearms Charge Defense Lawyer
At Benzaken, Maguire, Sheehan & Wood, LLP, we know how Plymouth County prosecutors handle gun cases. We’ve defended clients in Brockton District Court and Brockton Superior Court against exactly these charges.
We analyze every angle — from the stop, to the search, to the licensing burden, to the jury instructions. Cases like Ferrara prove that convictions can be overturned when the Commonwealth oversteps.
If you or a loved one has been charged with carrying a firearm, possessing a loaded gun, or facing allegations of defacement, don’t wait. The earlier you involve an attorney, the more options you have.
Related Topics
Conclusion
The SJC’s decision in Commonwealth v. Ferrara is a major reminder of how complex firearms law has become in Massachusetts. Even where a gun is found, convictions can be overturned if the Commonwealth fails to prove its case the right way.
For defendants in Brockton and across Plymouth County, the message is clear: do not face firearms charges alone. The law is evolving, the stakes are high, and the right defense strategy can mean the difference between prison and freedom.
Call to Action:
If you are facing firearms charges in Brockton or anywhere in Massachusetts, contact Benzaken, Maguire, Sheehan & Wood, LLP today. Our experienced defense attorneys know how to fight unlawful searches, challenge licensing issues, and defend against gun charges in Plymouth County courts. Call now for a free consultation.