SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

[esqappellate]

Should take between 4 to 6 weeks. Mine took exactly 5 weeks.

Thanks!

 

[Lex Armarum]

Exactly.

I do not know what they consider a crime. Do they mean traffic incidents? Are you "charged" with a crime when you break a traffic law?


There is no clear answers to any of this.

Maybe some of the lawyers could chime in?

I've already answered this in one of the million Woollard threads. Violation of a traffic law is still a criminal offense.

 

[Lex Armarum]

Nope

The box was already ordered opened by Judge Legg there is no going back. Gansler can hold his breath till he passes out in a temper tantrum. In the end, someone will grab the key and open the box for him.

This case and the weaver case are going to be used far and wide as a supplemental authority, to expand the 2A foundation.

You think? I'm not so sure. I think the State will change the locks and the 4th Cir. will waffle on appeal. It's not as conservative as it once was that to King Zero.

 

[swinokur]

Mailed my VA non-res application today. Anyone have any idea how long it will take. My background is super clean

I did mine over a year ago, but it was just under 30 days.

 

[gsrcrxsi]

why dont you just search for yourself in MD Judiciary Case search and write down anything that comes up?

I searched back 15 years for anything and everything. only 2 traffic tickets came up, within the last 3 years. (i have more than that, from earlier dates, but thats all it shows)

 

[Inigoes]

You think? I'm not so sure. I think the State will change the locks and the 4th Cir. will waffle on appeal. It's not as conservative as it once was that to King Zero.

Yes, I think.

The lower courts have been screaming for guidance. Since this judgement doesn't change existing law, it just changes the mindset behind 2A.

 

[JavaDan]

I've already answered this in one of the million Woollard threads. Violation of a traffic law is still a criminal offense.

Rusty, I am not a lawyer - you are, and I respect you. However . . . .

The language in the permit law is very clear about their mandate insofar as crimes that will impact a permit application:

1. Is 18 years of age or older.
2. Has not been convicted of a felony or of a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year.
3. Has not been committed within the previous 10 years to any juvenile detention center for longer than one year.
4. Is not an addict or alcoholic nor has ever been convicted of a narcotics offense.
5. Has not, based on the results of investigation, exhibited a propensity for violence or instability.

I think context here is important as it is with most applications of the statutes.

Yes, speeding 15mph over the limit is technically a crime. It is just annotated in the traffic law instead of Art 27. Does it have any bearing whatsoever in the context of the application review based on the permit application law? - I think not.

IMHO, if you had a traffic charge that could have resulted in you being put into one of the categories above which may exclude you from the permit being approved, I would include it. e.g. DWI, DUI, unauthorized use or any other traffic offense where the penalty might apply to one of the things enumerated in the law.

If, however, you are worried about speeding, improper lane change and the like, I would answer no on the application. It has no bearing whatsoever with anything within the context of the reasons for which you can be denied a permit.

Bottom line, if one had a traffic charge that could have, or did, result in a 1 year prison sentence or was in any way related to alcohol or drugs, one would not be wise to answer no.

Should you answer no because of this concept of context, and you had a couple of speeding tickets, you might be thinking about whether or not they might find those on your driving record and then deny you because you weren't truthful on the application. Firstly, I think if you honestly didn't have anything that bears on the denial reasons, then you are being truthful. Secondly, I think the courts would have a real problem with that. If a non-disclosed traffic ticket that had no bearing on the enumerated denial reasons in the law is their reason for denial, then MSP would be trampling on your 2A rights far worse then applying the G&S standard.

Just my thoughts.

 

[ezliving]

Maryland has filed their request for a stay.

http://delegatemike.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Motion-for-Stay-Final-as-filed-11.pdf

Interestingly, they've also asked Judge Legg to explain what his granting does. One thing that was missing from Judge Legg's decision was an order of relief.

Judge Legg told Maryland G&S is unconstitutional, but he never ordered them to issue permits or anything.

Could be interesting

¿No habla ingles?

 

[krucam]

The 3 questions are: Have you ever been ARRESTED/CHARGED/CONVICTED with a violation of Criminal Law.

I went into Lexis/Nexis MD Online.

Throw the phrase "under the influence" into the search and I get the results in the first pdf. "Under the Influence" comes under the "Criminal Law" moniker with § 2-503, Homicide by motor vehicle while under the influence.

If 'Criminal Law' is defined in the application as it is shown under Lexisnexis, then you are stuck with the following categories:

CRIMINAL LAW
Md. Ann. Code art. , §
TITLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
TITLE 2. HOMICIDE
TITLE 3. OTHER CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
TITLE 4. WEAPON CRIMES
TITLE 5. CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES, PRESCRIPTIONS, AND OTHER SUBSTANCES
TITLE 6. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
TITLE 7. THEFT AND RELATED CRIMES
TITLE 8. FRAUD AND RELATED CRIMES
TITLE 9. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
TITLE 10. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH, CONDUCT, AND SENSIBILITIES
TITLE 11. INDECENCY AND OBSCENITY
TITLE 12. GAMING -- STATEWIDE PROVISIONS
TITLE 13. GAMING -- LOCAL PROVISIONS
TITLE 14. GENERAL SENTENCING PROVISIONS

Final Answer, Regis. IANAL.

 

[MDPrinter]

So I took the plunge and sent my application off today. I remember reading that there was a md delegate that we were supposed to get in contact with after applying but I can't seem to find it. Does anyone remember where that info was?

 

[Mr H]

The smart thing to do would be for the state legislature to direct the MSP to honor non-resident permits held by MD residents for the next three years. This would give enough time to work through the backlog.

Good idea. But then, I'd qualify...

But seriously, I think that would make for an interesting middle-ground.

 

[martinithebun]

So we all know the stay was coming but I can't find when the stay would be ruled on. Does anyone know?

 

[Maryland Hunter]

So I took the plunge and sent my application off today. I remember reading that there was a md delegate that we were supposed to get in contact with after applying but I can't seem to find it. Does anyone remember where that info was?

Delegate Smigiel

michael.smigiel@house.state.md.us

Email MSI as well, according to Patrick, they are developing a database of sorts.

MH

 

[MDPrinter]

Delegate Smigiel

michael.smigiel@house.state.md.us

Email MSI as well, according to Patrick, they are developing a database of sorts.

MH

thanks

 

[Patrick]

I love Gansler is such a CF. He asks for clarification of the relief because he is so dense that he doesn't understand the ruling to stop violating a citizens Constitutional rights. Then in the next sentence I don't know what you are going to tell us but after you tell me what to do please stay the order.

Don't you have to provide a reason the stay is necessary? His can you do that if you don't know how the order will impact you?

Actually, we have smart people on our team who caught that same issue immediately and predicted a 59(e) motion to clarify the results. On day one we talked about the issues between a declaratory judgement and an actual order.

It's legal stuff that gets lost in the chatter. Both the state and others are reacting to the fact the judge said G&S is unconstitutional. The fact he didn't order a permit for Woollard or actual striking of the clause kinda got lost. It doesn't change the fact that requiring G&S is unconstitutional. It might mean more work if he does not clarify it.

 

[ICW2019]

Hello all first post and long time reader lol. Had a email conversation with Asst AG Mark Bowen and thought Id post it. Start from bottom because top is most recent.

Mr. Watson,

I believe that my statement is self-explanatory. *If you have specific
questions concerning the handgun permit process, I suggest you contact the
Licensing Division of the Maryland State Police.

Mark H. Bowen
Assistant Attorney General

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Watson [mailto:mcw8118@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 11:46 AM
To: Mark Bowen
Subject: Re: Recent CCW Ruling

Thank you for replying to my email. When you say that it will continue to be
guided by the courts interpretation that means you will be still applying
the good and substantial clause? Or for now are issuing permits on the
current judgement from the Woolard v Sheridan case?

Thank you again,
Michael Watson



On Mar 8, 2012, at 9:44 AM, "Mark Bowen" <MBowen@mdsp.org> wrote:

Dear Mr. Watson,

In applying Maryland's handgun permit law, the Maryland State Police will
continue to be guided by the courts' interpretation of the law. The
Attorney
General's Office is appealing the trial judge's decision and is asking the
trial judge to keep the "good and substantial reason" requirement in place
during the appeal process. *The trial judge has not yet ruled on whether
the
"good and substantial reason" requirement will remain in effect.

Mark H. Bowen
Assistant Attorney General



-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Watson [mailto:mcw8118@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 12:23 PM
To: LCU@mdsp.org
Subject: Recent CCW Ruling

Hello,

As I have recently seen the good and substantial clause has been struck
down
in a federal court. Until Maryland has a decision from an appeal, this
actually makes the state shall issue to all who pass the normal background
and requirements needed for the application process. A response from your
department would bd greatly appreciated. My email is mcw8118@comcast.net.

Sincerely,
Mike

 

[Boondock Saint]

So we all know the stay was coming but I can't find when the stay would be ruled on. Does anyone know?

Plaintiffs must respond to the motion by 3/16. I'm guessing/assuming a ruling would come in the following two weeks.

 

[Atlasarmory]

This Look OK ?


Good afternoon Delegate Smigiel

I am contacting you at the request of MSI/ Maryland shooters to inform you that I have submitted an application to The Maryland state police requesting a permit to carry a concealed firearm. I can be reached at this E-mail address if you require any further information.
Thank you My Name here

 

[Soda]

Mr. Watson,

I believe that my statement is self-explanatory. *If you have specific
questions concerning the handgun permit process, I suggest you contact the
Licensing Division of the Maryland State Police.

Mark H. Bowen
Assistant Attorney General

That wasn't self-explanatory! That was intentionally vague! What a jerk. He could have just answered your request for clarification.

I'd love it if Legg responded to the State's request for clarification with the same tone: "I believe that my ruling is self-explanatory. *If you have specific questions concerning the ruling, I suggest you read the US Constitution."

 

[Patrick]

An SSBI, without poly costs in the area of 80k. With poly, depending on which polygraphs need to be taken, can go upwards of 120k. It requires meeting people face-to-face and following all leads uncovered during those interviews, to include interviewing other people spoken about during those interviews. Recently, SSBIs can take anywhere from 30 days to over 6 months.

Curiously enough, the "Authorization for Release of Information" portion of the MD Permit Application gives the MSP the permission to pull any security clearance investigative reports and notes. I wonder if the MSP actually does go to OPM and requests their files on an individual, and if so, what OPM's response is?

If you have a TS, you shouldn't have any worries about being denied a MD Permit.

They would not get them from OPM. Nobody does. The roster of cleared people is protected like a hungry dog protects his meal. HSD wanted to look at them and OPM told them to pound sand. The Sec'ty of HSD asked directly, and was told to pound sand.

If you think it through, it's a good policy.