Consider the following:
In 1969, Mr. Bray pled guilty in Kansas to being an accessory after the fact (helping to cover up a crime). Due to his limited role in the offense, his absence of prior record and his cooperation, he was placed on two years summary probation, which he successfully completed prior to moving to California. In California, Mr. Bray worked at Convair and the district attorney’s office. In 1972, he filled out an application to vote. He discussed his prior conviction with the deputy of the registrar of voters who advised him to say on the registration form that he had been convicted of a felony and to fill out the supplementary explanation form, which he did. He was allowed to vote.
In 1973, Mr. Bray applied for a job as a security guard. On the application, he answered that he had been arrested or charged with a crime but had not been convicted of a felony. At the bottom of the page, Mr. Bray explained the circumstances surrounding his arrest. He was subsequently notified by the Bureau of Collection and Investigative Services that he had been registered as a guard.
He purchased a revolver and completed forms on which he indicated that he had not been convicted of a felony or a crime with a punishment of more than one year. After the statutory waiting period, a gun was delivered to him.
In 1973, Mr. Bray applied for a job as a contract compliance investigator. In response to the question asking whether he had been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor, Mr. Bray wrote “?” and explained the circumstances of his arrest and sentence. He followed a similar protocol when applying for two jobs in 1974.
In 1974, pursuant to a search warrant, Mr. Bray led investigators to a closet where he kept the gun.
Mr. Bray was charged under Section 12021, which reads:
“Any person, who has been convicted of a felony under the laws of any state, who owns or has in his or her possession or under his or her custody or control any firearm, is guilty of a felony.”
Mr. Bray argues that he did not know that he was a felon and that his mistake should exonerate him. Provide an opinion in this case explaining what the prosecution must prove in order to get a conviction under Section 12021.
Please write it as simple as you can.