## Facts

- Julio Marrero, a federal corrections officer at a federal facility in Danbury, Connecticut, was arrested in 1977 at a Manhattan social club for possessing a loaded .38 caliber pistol without a New York pistol permit.
- He was charged with third-degree criminal possession of a weapon under New York law, which criminalized such possession but exempted “peace officers.”
- The exemption incorporated Criminal Procedure Law definitions that included “correction officers of any state correctional facility or of any penal correctional institution.”
- Marrero claimed he believed, based on his reading of the statutes and informal views of others, that he qualified as a “peace officer” and thus was exempt from licensing requirements.
- The trial court initially dismissed the indictment on exemption grounds; the Appellate Division reversed and reinstated the indictment.
- After a jury trial, the court refused Marrero’s requested mistake-of-law instruction under Penal Law § 15.20, and the jury convicted him.

## Issues

1. Whether Penal Law § 15.20 permits a mistake-of-law defense based on a defendant’s personal, good-faith misreading of a statutory exemption.
2. Whether reliance on the text of a statute, when the defendant’s interpretation is incorrect rather than the statute being officially misdeclared, qualifies as reliance on an “official statement of the law” under § 15.20.

## Decision

- The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s order affirming the conviction.
- The court held that Marrero’s asserted belief did not qualify for Penal Law § 15.20’s mistake-of-law defense because it was based on his personal misunderstanding, not on an official statement later determined erroneous.
- The court upheld the trial court’s refusal to charge the jury on mistake of law.

## Legal Principles

- The general rule remains that ignorance or mistake of law does not excuse criminal conduct; Penal Law § 15.20 codifies that rule with limited exceptions.
- A mistake-of-law defense under § 15.20 is confined largely to reliance on an “official statement of the law” (e.g., statute, judicial decision, or authorized administrative interpretation) that is later determined invalid or erroneous.
- A defendant’s private interpretation or misreading of correctly stated statutory language does not constitute reliance on an “official statement” for purposes of § 15.20.
- For weapon possession of this type, the offense does not require proof that the defendant knew the conduct was unlawful; subjective belief about legal status does not negate liability absent a qualifying statutory exception.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Marrero’s weapon-possession conviction, holding that a defendant’s good-faith but incorrect personal reading of a statutory exemption is not a mistake-of-law defense under Penal Law § 15.20 without reliance on an official, authorized statement later found erroneous.


People v. Marrero, 69 N.Y.2d 382, 507 N.E.2d 1068 (N.Y. 1987)