Berkeley couple arrested with unregistered gun stash

Police said they found a couple trying to flee with numerous firearms after accidentally firing a round into a neighbor's home. Image: Google Maps

Police said they found a couple trying to flee with numerous firearms after accidentally firing a round into a neighbor’s home. Image: Google Maps

A North Berkeley couple who officials said had stockpiled weapons and discussed “eventual war with the government” was arrested last week by the Berkeley Police Department.

Last Tuesday, just after 11:30 p.m., police received a report that someone had fired a bullet through the walls of a neighbor’s apartment in the 1700 block of Highland Place, according to court documents. Police responded and found two people, later identified as Jeremy Adrian and his girlfriend, Masayo Shinohara, on the second floor landing.

The couple had with them a case an officer identified as one commonly used for the storage and transportation of weapons, according to police, along with a black rolling duffel bag. Police detained Adrian and Shinohara in handcuffs. According to an officer at the scene, Adrian admitted that he had fired a gun into the next-door unit.

According to Adrian’s attorney, Elena Condes, who represented her client Friday at his arraignment hearing, Adrian had removed the ammunition clip from his gun but had not realized there was still a bullet in the chamber. Condes told Alameda County Superior Court Judge Paul Delucchi on Friday that Adrian had accidentally fired the weapon, then immediately went over to his neighbor’s apartment to apologize and “make sure everybody was OK.”

Police said, according to court documents, that the bullet apparently entered the next door apartment through a bedroom wall and shattered a mirror.

After detaining Adrian and Shinohara, according to court documents, police located in their possession a semi-automatic SKS assault rifle, which they identified as an illegal weapon “because it violated the California Assault Weapon ban;” and other firearms and ammunition. Police said they found a Browning .22-caliber semi-automatic pistol and accompanying silencer, along with two Saiga 12-gauge semi-automatic shotguns, in the couple’s possession.

In addition, according to court documents, authoriries charged the couple with identity theft after police found personal information and access card account information for another person, identified as Celena Galicia. Deputy district attorney Ursula Jones Dickson told the judge Friday that credit cards in Galicia’s name had been used by the couple to purchase various items.

Defense attorney Condes told Judge Delucchi that, though unregistered, most of the firearms in her client’s possession were not illegal: “It’s not as bad as it seems,” she said, as she argued for a bail reduction, which the judge ultimately granted, from $530,000 to $400,000. (Condes also noted that Adrian had no prior criminal record.)

But prosecutor Dickson described the couple as “extremely dangerous,” and said Adrian and Shinohara had conversations with police about how they had been “stockpiling weapons” and the possibility of “eventual war with the government.”

“They were both found leaving, trying to get rid of guns in bags,” she said. “They had multiple guns and multiple types of ammunition. They are extremely dangerous.”

They were arraigned Friday on eight felony counts related to the shooting, the firearms, the silencer and identity theft. (See the full complaint from the district attorney’s office.)

Adrian, 46, and Shinohara, 43, were scheduled to enter their pleas Monday morning. Adrian is being held with a bail of $400,000 at Santa Rita Jail.

Shinohara’s bail was set at $230,000, but she is being held, also at Santa Rita, without bail due to a federal immigration hold. She told the judge she could not afford her own attorney, and Delucchi said the court would assign a public defender to represent her.

Would you like a digest of the day’s Berkeley news sent to your inbox? Click here to subscribe to Berkeleyside’s free Daily Briefing.

Print Friendly
Tagged , , , , , ,
  • WuiceJeasel

    More gun-grabbing loons!

  • NAParish

    The pointer on the Google Map above is at the wrong location, and points to a house on La Loma rather than the address in the complaint. This is the correct location:

  • emraguso

    Thank you — we have fixed it.

  • 4eenie

    1. Did this couple also have any crossbows in their possession?

    2. Let’s see how Copwatch manipulates the story to meet their agenda.

  • bswp

    There are paranoid people in every city, in every state, across the nation – yes, even here in Berkeley. And while it’s not against the law to be paranoid, or for non-prohibited persons to own firearms, it IS illegal to fire a weapon into your neighbor’s apartment. And the California AW ban is very intricate, if his rifle had banned features, but was not a RAW (Registered Assault Weapon) then he’s in trouble. Note to editor: There is no such thing as a “Saig” shotgun. The brand name is “Saiga.”

  • emraguso

    Thank you — I was just going off the court documents but I can update the story to reflect that.

  • Curious Jorge

    What’s an “unregistered gun stash” anyway; how would you register a “gun stash”…? Some firearms need to be registered; most don’t.

  • Ergo402

    Let’s not lose the forest in the trees. It doesn’t matter how one spells “Saiga” or what constitutes a “stash”. What matters is that yet another “law-abiding gun owner”, the kind of person the gun lobby embraces as a “good guy with a gun”, has proven himself to be neither law-abiding nor a good guy. He’s lucky that his stupidity and paranoia have landed him in jail only for firing into a adjacent apartment and possessing all kinds of ridiculous weaponry, and not for the homicide that he narrowly avoided committing. Do we really want people like him forming La Pierre’s “cordon of protection” around our children?

  • Fiznit

    Have we lost sight that this has nothing to do with guns? It’s about harming innocent people
    that go to work, school, or just stay at home. Especially the target of government. Really, again? There are numerous violent methods that can be acted out towards our community. Don’t just focus on guns. If it’s not an active shooter, it’s a bomb, a chemical or someone just wielding a knife. What amazing policies are we going to create that make our business owners or the regular folks that work in City Hall feel safe? We have plenty of laws in place right now, but that doesn’t stop the action of someone marching into our City Hall and hurting innocent people that work there. We should be focusing on tangible and realistic protective measures. Harvey Milk was government. Back then, what protective measures were in place to prevent someone from gaining access to him in his place of employment? Berkeley, we’re better than this… instead of ranting about guns, cooks and all government is evil, let’s use our collective energy and provide better safeguards for our public, private and city infrastructure and support those that take care of our incredible community.

  • batard

    Don’t like that lede either; it implies (incorrectly) that guns need to be registered in order to be legal. As you point out some do, most don’t.

  • batard

    If you read the criminal complaint, the DA charged him with deliberately and maliciously firing into an inhabited building. Maybe that’s an over-reach in order to start the plea bargaining process, I don’t know.

    Your argument is a straw-man though .. nobody heralded this individual as a “law-abiding gun owner”, only to be proven wrong. First time either one of has heard of him I bet, and the context is that he .. wasn’t.

  • emraguso

    My apologies: I actually did think firearms needed to be registered.
    The complaint alleges “unlawful possession” of four “assault weapons” — and it sounds like only one of them was technically “illegal” due to the California code. I thought it was — in relation to the other three — their lack of registration that made the possession “unlawful” — but I’m beginning to realize that I may not understand this completely. Care to shed any light, as you’re saying it’s fine to have unregistered assault weapons? Or are you making a broader point? I’m happy to try to follow up with authorities as well.

  • batard

    Hard to say about which was illegal based on the details in the complaint, but the SKS is specifically called out in PC 30510(a)(11), and likely the Saiga and the pistol had “features” that defined them as AW’s under 30515(a)(7) and 30515(a)(4)(a).

    Registration is for folks who were in possession one of the above before they became illegal, which is to say if you have one that’s “unregistered” it’s not that you failed to register it but that you are in possession of an illegal AW. I think this guy is in a lot of trouble.

    Generally speaking though, rifles aren’t “registered”. Yes you have to jump through certain hoops to acquire, but in the end there’s no database of who has what. This is a big deal for “2A” fanatics, and to be honest it’s an important principle regardless of how you feel about guns generally because it speaks to the core of what it means to have a “right”. Basically the line of argument is that if the government can require to you to ask permission to exercise a right, and keep track of when you exercise it, that amounts to an encroachment.

    Please don’t mistake me for an NRA nutjob, though my wife might differ. I just find both sides of this one easy to read. Recommend for more info.

  • Completely_Serious

    Guns? In Berkeley? Boooom!

    Two points if you can identify the source of the comment. I’ll give you hint, I’m nostalgic for Ozzie’s shakes.

  • The_Sharkey

    It amazes me how ignorant and terrified most Californians are when it comes to the subject of guns. But then again most folks are also ignorant and terrified of power tools, which are not all that dissimilar.

  • The_Sharkey

    If they had illegal-in-California guns then they weren’t law-abiding, were they?

    Try thinking before commenting. Try coming up with your own ideas instead of parroting propaganda.

  • Eric Gorovitz

    True, this individual has never been specifically identified as “law-abiding”, and that’s the fundamental flaw with the “good guy with a gun” fallacy. The gun lobby promotes widespread availability of guns with little or no oversight, then says “Oh – we weren’t talking about THAT guy!” whenever one of the beneficiaries of their irresponsible policies goes on a shooting spree. This guy IS that guy; the only reason he wasn’t technically “law abiding” before he nearly killed his neighbors is that he happens to live in one of the few states with relatively responsible gun laws (the effectiveness of which is undermined by irresponsibly weak laws in neighboring states). Until he did a really stupid thing with one of his many guns, he looked like a good guy.

    It’s worth noting that the really stupid thing he did (according to his story) that got him caught actually happens all of the time. Congressman Langevin, the only sitting member of Congress who is paralyzed, is in a wheel chair because he was shot unintentionally in the locker room of a police station, by a cop.

  • The_Sharkey

    “He’s completely law-abiding, as long as you ignore the ways in which he was breaking the law!”


    As for accidental shootings happening “all the time,” they are far, far less common than automobile accidents. Roughly 15,500 accidental gun injuries per year compared to 2.9 million annual injuries from automobile accidents. So, you know, not actually that common.

  • 2ndGenBerkeleyan

    Berkeley Farms? Farms in Berkeley? Moo!

    When was the last time Berkeley Farms actually operated in Berkeley?

    This dedication is exemplified in the 1998 opening of our milk processing plant in Hayward, which replaced our 50 year old Emeryville facility.

    This new facility fulfills a public commitment by Berkeley Farms to maintain its headquarters and milk processing plant in the Bay Area.

    Berkeley Farms is owned by Dean Foods, a Fortune 500 company and a leader in the dairy foods category.

  • Gus

    I’m pretty certain this takes the prize for the most asinine thing you have ever come up with. And it’s a high bar…

    This is a new story about a man who freely expressed a desire to commit violence — to the police, no less — who is in possession of at least one and possibly three illegal battlefield weapons, and who put a bullet through his neighbor’s apartment, apparently because he is totally unqualified in using the deadly weapon that he possesses.

    And your considered response is, “Gee, I just can’t believe something like that would scare people. They must be ignorant. Oh, and I don’t know the difference between a Skilsaw and an SKS.”


  • Gus

    Except that Ergo was talking about the position of the National Rifle Association, which continues to argue that Roberti-Roos is unconstitutional and, through the NRA-ILA, is still actively engaged in undermining California’s gun laws.

    So, as Ergo accurately pointed out, the NRA would consider Adrian law-abiding gun owner who is being deprived of his constitutional rights by an over-reaching and illegitimate state authority.

    Try reading the posts you’re responding to instead before jumping at yet another opportunity to try to convince everyone how clever you are.

  • The_Sharkey

    I’ve found that reading comments in context and looking at what people are replying to helps me avoid looking like a blithering ninny when commenting on the internet. Perhaps it’s something you should consider trying.

    My comment was a reply to Curious Jorge and batard’s comments about people thinking that all guns need to be registered when they don’t. That’s why it’s a comment about how scared/ignorant people are about guns in general, rather than mentioning anything about this specific incident.

    The More You Know™

  • The_Sharkey

    Can you please point out where Eric mentions Roberti-Roos in the comment I replied to?

  • The_Sharkey

    PS: Before you reply, don’t forget the identity theft charge, Gus. Even if you want to try to read between the lines to add NRA opposition to Roberti-Roos into Eric’s comment, the identity theft still makes them non-law-abiders no matter what you or the NRA’s opinion is about the legality of various semi-automatic weapons.

  • guest

    There are indeed many “good guys with a guns” just as there are many honest, worthy folks who misfortune has put on the street. The problem is: Separating gun nuts and vicious gutter punks from the rest of their guiltless respective populations is a special skill only special people like you, Gus, and a few others have. So rather than overburden you folks, we decided to use “laws”.

  • emraguso

    Thank you for the clarification. Sounds like a lot of penal code info re: firearms is pretty hard to parse. You may be right that it was something about the features that was identified as illegal, as I know the complaint did note various characteristics of at least some of the weapons… I can definitely try to find out more from the DA but not positive we’ll get a response.

  • guest

    We’ve tried prohibition of a much bigger killer, alcohol. It didn’t last.

  • sue

    OK, so I am ignorant and terrified of guns. How educated and calm do I need to be given that I will never be using one?

  • sue

    Well, when you think about how many cars there are and how often people are driving in those cars as opposed to how many people have guns and how often they use them, then your statement maybe is not that accurate.

  • batard

    If you would like to express an opinion about gun regulations, or choose to vote for a candidate who has an agenda related to gun regulation — then you should probably be informed on the issue.

    It’s okay to stay terrified and ignorant, but please don’t participate in the debate if you want to stay that way.

  • Voxhumana

    So she could afford all those weapons and munitions, but not an attorney? Okay, so she was stockpiling weapons for an eventual war with the government? If she’s not a citizen, that makes her an enemy combatant. Treason or terrorism, take your pick.

  • guest

    Clear reasoning at last. A great and unexpected joy!

  • Voxhumana

    There were measures in place to protect Harvey Milk in his work place office. There were metal detectors at the front door. Dan White, a City Supervisor, chose to climb through a basement window to avoid the detectors. Since he was a recognized City Supervisor, no one took any notice of him in the basement, before he proceeded upstairs to kill the mayor and Milk.

  • guest

    Gus…you restated Sharkey’s statement by changing the object of the idea from “unfamiliarity with guns” to “terrorist action”. That’s a leap I’d expect from our Gov’ment, not a Bside poster.

  • batard

    Nor did it work very well.

  • Bishop George Berkeley

    “Pretty hard to parse” might be the understatement of your career! Try “pretty much impossible.” Even the experts can’t figure it out. “batard” is right — is a good resource, but 5 minutes there and you begin to realize what a Sysiphean task it is…..

  • The_Sharkey

    You might want to look up the numbers, Sue. According to the most recent estimates I’ve seen there are almost exactly as many guns as there are cars in the United States of America.

  • batard


  • batard

    It is and it isn’t. Here’s a flowchart that tries to make sense of
    it, at least where rifles are concerned.

    If you read all of
    this and think to yourself, “what a mess!” then you are one step closer
    to understanding the NRA/2A point of view that the whole thing is a
    misguided disaster. Basically these attempts to regulate weapons based
    on “evil” features and technical details overlooks a basic truth .. in
    the end they are all implements of destruction, and the notion of an
    “assault weapon” is largely a cosmetic one. Guns enable a variety of
    purposes, some of which we (variably) consider legitimate and others not.
    Sharky’s analogy to power tools is pretty much spot on.

  • The_Sharkey

    The Small Arms Survey in 2007 by the Graduate Institute of International
    Studies in Geneva estimated 270 million firearms in the US.
    Overall, there were an estimated 254.4 million registered passenger vehicles in the United States according to a 2007 DOT study.
    However that doesn’t speak to the concentration of ownership. I feel like gun ownership is probably more concentrated than car ownership due to people like the subjects of this story who have multiple guns but I never would have have guessed that there were more guns than cars in the USA so my feelings about the subject may not be very accurate.

  • guest

    Which? Treason or terrorism?

  • Guest

    People in Berkeley being so quick to label someone an “enemy combatant” and suitable for torture.

  • pstaylor

    Not to mention that the NRA embraces the “We need guns to protect ourselves from the government” argument, which these people were doing.

  • guest

    Maybe were just sensitive right now about having our legs blown off.

  • Fact Based

    You are much more likely to be run over by a drunk driver on your way home from work or struck dead by lightning than you do of being killed by a terrorist.

  • Voxhumana

    I wasn’t implying that I condone torture. Just trying to clarify intent of the perpetrator.

  • Voxhumana

    When I want advice from an actuary, I’ll ask for it.

  • guest

    The comforting assurance of being…”much more likely…” fades quickly, when it happens to you (odds or no odds)

  • guest

    Just to put this out there, the main purpose of cars is transportation whereas the main purpose of guns is to hurt or kill someone. If someone was hoarding cars, well there wouldn’t be much to worry about.. but hoarding guns? that’s a little scary.

  • herethereeverywhere

    What has happened with this this case?