Thompson v. State

Appellant was convicted of possessing a short-barreled shotgun. He argues three points for reversal, two of which are without merit. The evidence was clear that the shotgun was operable or readily could be made operable. And appellant can hardly argue that he possessed the shotgun to protect his home when, in fact, the shotgun was found in the trunk of his car after the vehicle had been repossessed. Nor did *860appellant contend he had registered the shotgun under federal law. See Rinzler v. Carson, 262 So.2d 661 (Fla.1972).

Appellant’s last point, however, justifies reversal. Thompson contends…