In violation of both state and federal law, Ferri, a California resident, purchased both Navegar TEC-DC9 pistols in Las Vegas, Nevada using a counterfeit Nevada driver's license. Ferri bought one TEC-DC9 at pawn shop, the other at a gun show.

From the same Las Vegas pawn shop, using the same false ID, Ferri purchased the Norinco .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol also used in the shooting along with "many rounds" of .45 caliber “Black Talon” hollowpoint ammunition.

Ferri also acquired illegal 40- and 50-round extended magazines for the weapons and installed "Hell-Fire" trigger devices on the Navegar pistols. The aftermarket "Hell-Fire" triggers, not made by Navegar, modified the pistols to function as fully automatic weapons. (With a semiautomatic weapon, the trigger must be pulled to fire each round. A fully automatic weapon continues to fire as long as the trigger is depressed.)

In the 1999 California Court of Appeals hearing, the plaintiffs presented expert witnesses who identified the TEC-DC9 as a "military-patterned weapon typically issued to specialized forces such as security personnel, special operations forces, or border guards."

In testimony not disputed by Navegar, police chief Leonard J. Supenski, a nationally recognized firearms expert, stated that the TEC-DC9 differs from conventional handguns in several ways. A large capacity detachable magazine, "designed to deliver maximum firepower by storing the largest number of cartridges in the smallest . . . space," provides a level of firepower "associated with military or police, not civilian, shooting requirements."

Chief Supenski further testified that the TEC-DC9 is "completely useless" for hunting, is never used by competitive or recreational shooters and "has no legitimate sporting use." Supenski agreed with a BATF statement that assault weapons such as the TEC-DC9 "were designed for rapid fire, close quarter shooting at human beings." 

Of the TEC-DC9, Chief Supenski concluded, "You will not find these guns in a duck blind or at the Olympics. They are mass produced mayhem."

In the May 10, 2001 hearing before the California Supreme Court, Justice Marvin Baxter asked Navegar's attorney Ernest Getto if the design of the TEC-DC9 pistol, specifically its ease of concealment and rapid rate of fire, made it more likely to be used in criminal acts.

"It is conceivable any firearm could be used for criminal purposes," Getto replied. "This is true of this firearm as well."

The California Supreme Court is expected to rule within 90 days whether or not the plaintiffs are entitled to a trial in their suit against Navegar.