Norman v. State (FL) Open Carry lawsuit

Bob A · Jun 18, 2014

IANAL, but it sounds like the original judge didn't really want the guy convicted, so he didn't hand down a conviction. The defendant appealed, but the higher court refused the appeal, since there wasn't a complete verdict. So it's bouncing around in Legal Limbo, where doubtless everyone is hoping it will just die of old age in some dusty file.

But like I stated, it's all just a WAG on my part.

press1280 · Jun 19, 2014

Bob A said:
IANAL, but it sounds like the original judge didn't really want the guy convicted, so he didn't hand down a conviction. The defendant appealed, but the higher court refused the appeal, since there wasn't a complete verdict. So it's bouncing around in Legal Limbo, where doubtless everyone is hoping it will just die of old age in some dusty file.

But like I stated, it's all just a WAG on my part.

That's kind of what I thought, but it seems the district judge doesn't want to single handedly strike a statute or make a big pronouncement on the 2A. He wants the appeals court to do it for him.

fightinbluhen51 · Jun 19, 2014

Looks like a judicial game of defensive football where the punters are getting a serious workout.

Looks like, the appellate court said "it's your ball, take it and run with it, develop all the case law" since they had no jurisdiction. Basically, "rule on all the motions, have your trial, then we'll take the appeal and sort it all out."

Other than that, I don't know that we can garner anything from this. IANAL.

ryan_j · Jun 23, 2014

For those seeking some explanation:

http://www.humanevents.com/2014/06/22/norman-lawsuit-could-overturn-florida-open-carry-ban/

press1280 · Jun 23, 2014

Only thing new I see is that there's some "technicality" with the certification to the appeals court.
Fl Carry is urging people to contact the AG. I hope they don't; we need this to move up the chain, all the way up the chain if necessary.

press1280 · Aug 23, 2014

Florida's 4th Appeals court will hear the case on October 8th http://www.4dca.org/calendar/briefs/Oct 2014/10-8-14/10-08-14.shtml
The court declined orals earlier this year and sent back to the district court. I'm not understanding all that's going on in this case but it does look to be moving forward and parallels the arguments in Bonidy, which will also be heard by CA10 the same week.

press1280 · Oct 27, 2014

FYI the orals for this case were moved to November 6th at 10AM. Looks like it's just a live feed, they don't archive the cases. I would watch but I have to work.
http://www.4dca.org/video.shtml

press1280 · Nov 6, 2014

Tried to watch the orals today (and did). Problem is the dam audio didn't work. So that was a bust.

wjackcooper · Nov 7, 2014

A different approach. This would be a good problem to have in MD.

If the link(s) do not work, try the Florida Open Carry forum.

Florida constitutional challenge to Open Carry Ban

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7haFzE7HAM

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...titutional-challenge-to-Open-Carry-Ban/page11

Regards
Jack

press1280 · Nov 7, 2014

wjackcooper, you are the man!

Just watched. Norman's attorney did a phenomenal job, hitting all the points very well.
The state's attorney was out of her league, and kept using the "common sense" phrase with no backing whatsoever, and I believe intentionally evaded answering the question about how many states allow for open carry. One of the judges seemed inclined to the proposition that as long as a license is required, then it isn't a right.
This could be a huge win at the end of the day. Norman's attorney suggested at the end the court should rule and allow the legislature to change the statute.

wolfwood · Nov 8, 2014

Who is the lawyer who argued for the defense?I really enjoyed that argument.

I don't think that the governments lawyer had her heart in it. Remember she is required to defend the government's position regardless of what of it is.

Maestro Pistolero · Nov 8, 2014

wolfwood said:
Who is the lawyer who argued for the defense?I really enjoyed that argument.

I don't think that the governments lawyer had her heart in it. Remember she is required to defend the government's position regardless of what of it is.

She is not required by her job title to defend the government's position, unless that is the wish of her superiors or it is dictated by the politics that got her the title. There are plenty of examples of government attorneys declining to defend laws which have outlived the popularity or their party's constituents. They do have an obligation to defend and uphold the constitution. Unfortunately 2A jurisprudence is not yet developed enough for everyone to have clarity on what is or isn't constitutional.

press1280 · Nov 9, 2014

wolfwood said:
Who is the lawyer who argued for the defense?I really enjoyed that argument.

I don't think that the governments lawyer had her heart in it. Remember she is required to defend the government's position regardless of what of it is.

Eric Friday was Norman's attorney. He may have been FloridaCarry's attorney on other cases, which I may add are racking up a nice string of victories on the state level.
This one certainly has implications beyond Florida.

wolfwood · Nov 9, 2014

press1280 said:
Eric Friday was Norman's attorney. He may have been FloridaCarry's attorney on other cases, which I may add are racking up a nice string of victories on the state level.
This one certainly has implications beyond Florida.

What are they winning cases on? I've never been to Florida but from what I hear their laws are so lax it would be hard to find cases to litigate. Criminal law stuff?

press1280 · Nov 9, 2014

wolfwood said:
What are they winning cases on? I've never been to Florida but from what I hear their laws are so lax it would be hard to find cases to litigate. Criminal law stuff?

www.floridacarry.org Looks like mostly preemption cases

BeoBill · Feb 18, 2015

Volokh's take on this - interesting read.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...quire-concealed-carry-rather-than-open-carry/

swinokur · Feb 18, 2015

This comports with many MDS members views who have agreed that a state can determine the method of carry, but cannot ban both.

Hopefully this will lead to a SCOTUS ruling but they haven't seemed very interested in the last few cases asking for CERT.

Hopefully, the winds they are a changing.

Southwest Chuck · Feb 18, 2015

Here's a direct Link to the decision ....
https://edca.4dca.org/DCADocs/2012/3525/123525_DC05_02182015_083006_i.pdf

Florida Carry plans to appeal the loss to the Florida Supreme Court.

press1280 · Feb 18, 2015

swinokur said:
This comports with many MDS members views who have agreed that a state can determine the method of carry, but cannot ban both.

Hopefully this will lead to a SCOTUS ruling but they haven't seemed very interested in the last few cases asking for CERT.

Hopefully, the winds they are a changing.

I had a feeling they would go this way. It does support Peruta, which is a good thing and rejects Kachalsky, Woollard, and Drake. The split deepens......

Southwest Chuck · Feb 19, 2015

press1280 said:
I had a feeling they would go this way. It does support Peruta, which is a good thing and rejects Kachalsky, Woollard, and Drake. The split deepens......

I believe this case is in State court, not Federal District Court, so its not a direct bump in the current split. It does help though. Every little bit helps. We'll have to wait and see what the State Supreme Court has to say about it on appeal, assuming they take the case.

Norman v. State (FL) Open Carry lawsuit

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

όυ φροντισ

Ultimate Member

"Quack Pot Call Honker"

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Crank in the Third Row

In a State of Bliss

A Calguns Interloper.. ;)

Ultimate Member

A Calguns Interloper.. ;)

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics