California Penal Code section 23900 addresses changing, altering, removing, or obliterating a specified identifying mark on a firearm without first obtaining written permission from the Department of Justice. A charge under this section concerns the alleged act of changing the mark; mere possession of a firearm whose mark was already changed is addressed separately by other statutes and does not by itself establish who changed it. Section 23900 is a felony punishable under Penal Code section 1170(h), subject to the sentencing rules and the facts of the case. (Penal Code §23900; §17(a); §1170(h).)
What mark and what alleged act?
Section 23900 lists a maker’s name, model, manufacturer’s number, and other identifying marks. It also includes a distinguishing number or mark assigned by the Department of Justice. The statute applies to a pistol, revolver, or other firearm, and covers changing, altering, removing, or obliterating a listed mark without advance written DOJ permission. It does not say that possession alone proves the person performed one of those acts. (§23900.)
The relevant factual questions include which mark is identified in the charge, what firearm or covered item is involved, when the change allegedly occurred, and what evidence connects the accused to that act. For this statutory chapter, “firearm” also includes specified completed frames or receivers and firearm precursor parts. If the item’s classification matters, the exact definition and charged theory need review. (Penal Code §16520(a), (b)(12).)
Alteration and possession are different allegations
Section 23920 separately covers certain transactions and possession. Subdivision (a) makes it a misdemeanor to buy, receive, dispose of, sell, offer to sell, or possess a firearm bearing an altered identifying mark with knowledge of the change. Subdivision (b), effective January 1, 2024, separately addresses knowing possession of a firearm without a valid state or federal serial number or identifying mark. Neither provision makes possession proof that the accused altered the mark under section 23900. The charging papers and evidence should be reviewed to see which conduct and subsection are actually alleged. (Penal Code §23920(a)–(b).)
Section 23900 itself does not state a separate knowledge-of-alteration phrase or an intent-to-evade-identification requirement. That wording does not settle every disputed mental-state question; the actual charge, evidence, and applicable legal instructions require case-specific review.
Permission and other marking provisions
Prior written DOJ permission is part of section 23900’s text. Other provisions address different situations: section 23915 permits additional identifying indicia where original marks are not changed, and provides for owner restoration when authorized by DOJ; section 23910 concerns DOJ assignment of a distinguishing number or mark in specified circumstances. Those provisions do not create a blanket, retroactive defense to an alleged earlier alteration. (Penal Code §§23900, 23910, 23915.)
Section 23925 contains limited exceptions for specified conduct under section 23920. It does not exempt an alteration prosecuted under section 23900. An exception that applies to a possession or transaction provision should not be treated as permission to change a firearm mark. (Penal Code §23925.)
Records to preserve for counsel
Keep the charging document and preserve existing photographs, records identifying the item, and relevant acquisition or service records. Counsel can compare the alleged act, identified mark, item classification, timing, and any advance written DOJ permission with the evidence. Do not alter, restore, dispose of, or attempt to trace or evade identification of an item while trying to resolve the allegation.
For a consultation about a California firearm-mark allegation, contact the Law Offices of David S. Chesley at (800) 755-5174.