US v. Black 4th Circuit

[press1280]

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/115084.P.pdf

Open carry (where legal) cannot be the justification for a stop. It also refers to the open carrier as exercising his right to bear arms. Judge Davis (also on Wollard panel) is part of the opinion

 

[OnTarget]

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/115084.P.pdf

Open carry (where legal) cannot be the justification for a stop. It also refers to the open carrier as exercising his right to bear arms. Judge Davis (also on Wollard panel) is part of the opinion

Good find! You West Virginians (me too) are okay.

 

[OnTarget]

I think that our forum lawyers would be interested in reading this one.

 

[Goose Guy]

I think I like where this is going.

 

[Kharn]

Nice.
Just FYI, there is a typo in the opinion, 'bear arms' has two spaces in the middle, thus why a search won't turn it up. Its on page 14 of the PDF. Davis joined in the majority, without a separate opinion so his own thoughts aren't known beyond his agreement with Gregory. I wonder where Traxler disagreed with Gregory and Davis's reasoning, since he only agreed with the result.

 

[ih23]

Thanks for sharing this, it was a great read and decision.

 

[pilotguy]

Just to note that this was not a "clean" defendant--Black was a convicted felon, prohibited from possession. The court, however, found so much wrong with the stop, seizure (of Black), and arrest, that the prohibition didn't even enter into the decision with them.

 

[offroaD]

reminds me of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdBIYm-Wxxw

 

[joeyb34]

Great read!! This part is my favorite:

"Being a felon in possession of a firearm is not the default status. More importantly, where a state permits individuals to openly carry firearms, the exercise of this right, without more, cannot justify an investigatory detention."

 

[Les Gawlik]

Wow. Snarky.

"If police officers can justify unreasonable seizures on a citizen’s acquiescence, individuals would have no Fourth Amendment protections unless they interact with officers with the perfect amount of graceful disdain.'

 

[press1280]

Additionally, even if the officers were justified in detaining
Troupe for exercising his constitutional right to bear arms,
reasonable suspicion as to Troupe does not amount to, and is
not particularized as to Black, and we refuse to find reasonable
suspicion merely by association.

How can he be bearing arms when he wasn't in his home And he didn't have to show "need" either
28j letter on the way for Wollard?

 

[Dave21042]

Argued: December 7, 2012
Decided: February 25, 2013

Maybe we will get a ruling soon.

I know 2 weeks.

 

[Haides]

This looks good for us!

 

[Inigoes]

This looks good for us!

Careful, best to temper expectations!

 

[Haides]

Careful, best to temper expectations!

I know, I know... I gots excited. Me sawwy.

 

[Inigoes]

I will admit, the opinion uplifted my spirits.

We're waiting on the fat lady in the Woolard case.

 

[Kharn]

Argued: December 7, 2012
Decided: February 25, 2013

Maybe we will get a ruling soon.

I know 2 weeks.

Criminal cases go to the front of the line, you can't really compare their timelines. The best way is to look at the other civil cases heard around our case and see how many remain unanswered.

 

[Lawyer56]

An interesting read and a satisfying result from a very conservative jurisdiction (Fourth Circuit) but this criminal case has nothing to do with any pending gun-rights case.

 

[esqappellate]

An interesting read and a satisfying result from a very conservative jurisdiction (Fourth Circuit) but this criminal case has nothing to do with any pending gun-rights case.

Gura in Woollard just sent it to the court with a 28(j) letter. Attached.

 

[Haides]

Gura in Woollard just sent it to the court with a 28(j) letter. Attached.

How strong is the point Gura's making there sound? Is it actually relevant or is he just grasping at straws?