Pennsylvania Superior Court Rejects “Place of Abode” Defense in Gun Case Where Defendant Sometimes Stayed Overnight at Girlfriend’s House and Had Keys

Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Martin, 2025 PA Super 130, narrowing the “place of abode” defense for purposes of VUFA § 6106 and affirming the defendant’s conviction for carrying a concealed firearm without a license.

The Facts of Martin

The defendant was convicted in a bench trial in Allegheny County of a number of serious offenses, including attempted murder, aggravated assault, receiving stolen property, and several firearms offenses. He appealed, and the appeal focused on whether the Commonwealth proved that he carried a firearm without a license in violation of 18 Pa.C.S. § 6106 (VUFA 6106).

The charges arose out of an incident involving the defendant’s girlfriend. The defendant and his girlfriend had been in a relationship for years. He normally lived in a different home with his daughter and fiancée, but he would often stay at the girlfriend’s house. He had a set of keys to the house.

On the day of the shooting, the defendant went to the girlfriend’s home after she ignored his calls. They began to argue, and the argument became physical. According to the girlfriend, the defendant pulled a gun from his waistband and shot her. The defendant testified that the girlfriend was intoxicated, threatened to harm herself, and accidentally shot herself during a struggle. After the shooting, the defendant hid the gun in a trash can outside.

The trial court rejected the defendant’s version of events and found him guilty. The court sentenced him to 10.5 - 21 years’ incarceration. That sentence included a three to six year consecutive sentence for carrying a concealed firearm without a license.

The Issue on Appeal

On appeal, the defendant’s main argument was that he could not be convicted of violating § 6106 because he was carrying the firearm only inside his “place of abode.” Pennsylvania law potentially makes it a felony to carry a concealed firearm without a license, but the statute contains a number of exceptions. One important exception is that the statute does not criminalize carrying a concealed firearm in a person’s own place of abode or fixed place of business.

Accordingly, the defendant argued that he was in his place of abode because he frequently stayed at the girlfriend’s house, had a set of keys, and was even considering moving in. He argued that this made her residence one of his “places of abode,” even if his primary residence was elsewhere.

The Superior Court’s Decision

The Superior Court rejected this argument and affirmed the conviction. The Court explained that the “place of abode” exception is interpreted narrowly under Pennsylvania law. It generally requires that the defendant actually live at the property either permanently or at least temporarily at the time of the incident.

Here, the Court pointed out:

• The girlfriend testified that only she and her two children lived at the house.

• The defendant himself admitted in his testimony that he lived at the other house and only sometimes stayed over with the girlfriend

• On the day of the shooting, the defendant drove to the girlfriend’s house from the other neighborhood after not being able to reach her “for a few days.”

• When the girlfriend demanded the defendant leave after the altercation, she told him to “get the fuck out of my house,” highlighting that it was not his home.

As a result, the Court found that the defendant was not residing at the girlfriend’s house either permanently or temporarily at the time of the shooting, so he could not rely on the “place of abode” exception.

The Court also noted there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the defendant brought the gun to the house in his car. This would amount to an independent violation of § 6106, which also prohibits carrying a firearm in a vehicle without a license.

The Takeaway

For clients facing gun charges and for defense attorneys alike, Commonwealth v. Davis is an example of how strictly a Pennsylvania court may interpret the “place of abode” exception:

• Occasional overnight stays and having keys are not enough.
  You generally have to actually live there at the time in question. The building must either be your home or at least a temporary residence.

• The Commonwealth does not necessarily have to rule out every theoretical exception.
  Once the prosecution shows the defendant carried a firearm without a license outside his home or business, the burden effectively shifts to argue that the exception applies. The Commonwealth generally must disprove a defense beyond a reasonable doubt, but the defense has to introduce some evidence for a defense to apply.

• Carrying in a vehicle creates a separate problem.
  Even if the defendant had somehow established that he lived at the girlfriend’s house, bringing the firearm there in a car would still have violated § 6106(a)(1).

Facing criminal charges or appealing a criminal case in Pennsylvania?

Goldstein Mehta LLC Defense Attorneys

If you are facing criminal charges or under investigation by the police, we can help. We have successfully defended thousands of clients against criminal charges in courts throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey. We have successfully obtained full acquittals and dismissals in cases involving charges such as Conspiracy, Aggravated Assault, Rape, Violations of the Uniform Firearms Act, and First-Degree Murder. We have also won criminal appeals and PCRAs in state and federal court, including the successful direct appeal of a first-degree murder conviction and the exoneration of a client who spent 33 years in prison for a murder he did not commit. Our award-winning Philadelphia criminal defense lawyers offer a free criminal defense strategy session to any potential client. Call 267-225-2545 to speak with an experienced and understanding defense attorney today.