New York Appeals Court Considers Challenge to Unlicensed Handgun Possession Law

On October 20, 2026, New York’s highest appellate court heard oral arguments in a case that could affect the state’s handgun licensing rules. The dispute centers on Penal Code 265.03(3), which makes it a crime to possess a loaded firearm in public without a license.

Antrell Davis, who pleaded guilty to attempted second‑degree weapon possession, asked the court to dismiss his indictment, arguing that the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision requires modern gun restrictions to align with the nation’s founding era. The lower court in Monroe County denied his motion, and the conviction was later affirmed on appeal.

State’s Position and Attorney General’s Intervention

Attorney General Letitia James filed a brief urging the Court of Appeals to reject Davis’s constitutional challenge. The AG’s office argues that Bruen does not forbid states from requiring a license before a person can carry a handgun in public, and that New York’s law merely targets unlicensed possession of a loaded firearm.

Key Questions Raised by the Judges

During the hearing, Judge Shirley Troutman asked whether states may have licensing schemes, to which the defense answered “no” – states are not prohibited. The judges also probed the scope of the law, asking about assault‑rifle bans and whether a prior felon could be prosecuted for gun possession. The defense acknowledged that felons can be disqualified from possessing firearms.

What This Means for Everyday New Yorkers

If the court upholds the current statute, New Yorkers will continue to need a valid license to carry a loaded handgun in public. Those without a license could face second‑degree weapon possession charges. The law does not ban possession of a loaded firearm outright; it only criminalizes it when the holder lacks a license or other exemption.

People who think they may be affected should verify whether they hold a valid handgun license and understand that the burden of raising a licensing defense falls on the defendant. No deadline or immediate procedural change was mentioned in the arguments.

Potential Impact and Next Steps

The panel did not issue a decision after the hour‑long argument, leaving the outcome pending. The case may set precedent for how New York and other states structure licensing defenses under Bruen. Future Supreme Court arguments on assault‑rifle bans could also influence the court’s reasoning.

Anyone facing a similar charge or unsure about their licensing status should consider consulting a criminal defense attorney to assess defenses and licensing options.

This article is general information based on Courthouse News Service and court or agency records available at publication time. It is not legal advice; laws and deadlines differ by state and by case. Published October 21, 2026.