## Facts

- Colorado charged Charles B. Nakamura, an unnaturalized foreign-born resident, by information with unlawfully possessing a shotgun to shoot game.
- The charge was based on a 1921 statute that prohibited any “unnaturalized foreign-born resident” from owning or possessing a rifle or shotgun, with a limited defense-of-person-or-property exception.
- Nakamura moved to quash the information, arguing the statute violated the Colorado Constitution’s right to keep and bear arms and its provision granting resident aliens equal rights to acquire and possess property.
- The trial court granted the motion to quash, holding the statute unconstitutional.
- The prosecution sought review in the Colorado Supreme Court by writ of error.

## Issues

1. Whether a statute categorically prohibiting resident aliens from owning or possessing rifles and shotguns violates Colo. Const. art. II, § 13, which provides that the right of “no person” to keep and bear arms in defense of home, person, and property shall not be called in question.
2. Whether the statute violates Colo. Const. art. II, § 27, which provides that resident aliens may acquire, possess, enjoy, and dispose of real and personal property as native-born citizens.

## Decision

- The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the order quashing the information.
- The court held the statute unconstitutional because it functioned as a broad disarmament of resident aliens, conflicting with the state constitutional arms guarantee.
- The court also held the statute unconstitutional because it denied resident aliens the ability to possess personal property on equal terms with native-born citizens, contrary to the state constitutional property-equality provision.

## Legal Principles

- A state constitutional right to keep and bear arms stated in terms of “no person” protects individuals generally, including bona fide resident aliens, absent a valid constitutional limitation.
- A firearm such as a rifle or shotgun constitutes “personal property” within the meaning of constitutional provisions protecting property rights.
- A statute that imposes a class-based disability on resident aliens’ ability to possess personal property “as native-born citizens” conflicts with a constitutional command of equal property rights for resident aliens.
- Legislative placement of a restriction within game or conservation laws does not validate a categorical prohibition that substantially functions as a discriminatory disarmament measure inconsistent with explicit constitutional guarantees.

## Conclusion

The Colorado Supreme Court invalidated a statute that barred unnaturalized foreign-born residents from possessing rifles or shotguns, holding it violated the state constitution’s protections for the right of “no person” to keep and bear arms and for resident aliens’ equal right to possess personal property.


People v. Nakamura, 99 Colo. 262, 62 P.2d 246 (Colo. 1936)