Supreme Court Requested to Review MD Carry Case

[Kharn]

Is there an internet archive link? The response is due from who, SCOTUS, or MD?

supremecourt.gov has the docket info, I forget if they host documents, I think they do not. The response is due from MD, then Williams can respond, amicus can chime in and the SC will decide if they will hear the case

 

[Kharn]

Dumb....very dumb

get caught with gun, go to jail
toss gun in bush, maybe get caught, maybe grab gun after the cop leaves and get to go home. this was in PG County, talking his way out of it was never in the cards

 

[jpk1md]

get caught with gun, go to jail
toss gun in bush, maybe get caught, maybe grab gun after the cop leaves and get to go home. this was in PG County, talking his way out of it was never in the cards

Unless I've read this incorrectly he was transporting from one lawful residence (GF's) to his own lawful residence.

Nothing illegal about that.....even in Maryland.

 

[Inigoes]

Unless I've read this incorrectly he was transporting from one lawful residence (GF's) to his own lawful residence.

Nothing illegal about that.....even in Maryland.

That's the rub, it wasn't his residence.

(3) the carrying of a handgun on the person or in a vehicle while the person is transporting the handgun to or from the place of legal purchase or sale, or to or from a bona fide repair shop, or between bona fide residences of the person, or between the bona fide residence and place of business of the person, if the business is operated and owned substantially by the person if each handgun is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster;

 

[press1280]

Unless I've read this incorrectly he was transporting from one lawful residence (GF's) to his own lawful residence.

Nothing illegal about that.....even in Maryland.

I thought it had to be a place you own or lease, outside of a gun store or shooting range? The GF's residence would be a no-no.

 

[jpk1md]

I thought it had to be a place you own or lease, outside of a gun store or shooting range? The GF's residence would be a no-no.

We all had a discussion about this a while back as I recall in relation to things like shoots on the eastern shore......for example if one were to travel and stay in a hotel and keep guns in room that it perfectly acceptable.

If a person is staying at a GF's I don't see why this is essentially any different.

I guess what I'm saying in part is that had he kept it on him and not freaked he would have a much better case and the LEO wouldn't have had cause to stop/search.

To igneos point I think its very easy to argue that this would qualify as a bona fide residence and satisfy the law as written.

Now he's a defendent with credibility issues....leaving a firearm in the bushes doesn't exactly help his credibility or integrity.

 

[Kharn]

a hotel room is a legit destination because you are renting it, making it your bonafide residence. Your gf's place is not rented by you, so it does not qualify as your residence. I doubt Williams was a designated collector two weeks after buying his only handgun, so he could not claim he was returning from a private exhibition at his gf's.

 

[jpk1md]

a hotel room is a legit destination because you are renting it, making it your bonafide residence. Your gf's place is not rented by you, so it does not qualify as your residence. I doubt Williams was a designated collector two weeks after buying his only handgun, so he could not claim he was returning from a private exhibition at his gf's.

I don't mean to drag this off topic but I'm inclined to believe that it could be successfully argued that it is in fact a bona fide residence (temp or otherwise) and that most any lawyer would be able to make that argument in a court of law.

Particularly if it could be demonstrated that he had contributed financially in some manner to the GF's place....food, electric etc......its certainly a much better defence than trying to hide it in the bushes which is nothing less than an admission of guilt.

Residence (temporary or otherwise) is little more than a declaration/set of circumstances and this example is fundamentally no different than that of a Hotel, the only difference is that he paid cash/credit for the Hotel whereas he did not while staying at the GF's. This does not fundamentally detract from legitimacy of his temporary residence there.

 

[Inigoes]

Residence (temporary or otherwise) is little more than a declaration/set of circumstances and this example is fundamentally no different than that of a Hotel, the only difference is that he paid cash/credit for the Hotel whereas he did not while staying at the GF's. This does not fundamentally detract from legitimacy of his temporary residence there.

Actually a residence is a little more than what you describe. It's actually contains a contract of some sort, whether you rent/lease/own. Since he and gf did not have a contract of some sort, it can't be declared one of his residences.

 

[jpk1md]

Actually a residence is a little more than what you describe. It's actually contains a contract of some sort, whether you rent/lease/own. Since he and gf did not have a contract of some sort, it can't be declared one of his residences.

Google Residence Definition and you'll find all sorts of definitions that disagree with your assertion.

Would you argue against firearm possesion by someone that had lost their home and was living out of a trailer and/or friends home and frequently moving to places that he/she has a legitimate right to be?

Would you argue that someone staying at a friends place for one or more days while travelling somehow disqualifies them from calling this their temporary residence but somehow staying in a hotel room doesn't? Thats kinda silly don't you think?

Frankly I'm surprised to hear you argue against this and lawful possesion in a place he had an obvious legitimate reason to have resided (temporarily).

I think the defendant would have a much better case had he not attempted to abandon the firearm (temporarily) in a public place than if he had not done so.

 

[Inigoes]

Google Residence Definition and you'll find all sorts of definitions that disagree with your assertion.

Would you argue against firearm possesion by someone that had lost their home and was living out of a trailer and/or friends home and frequently moving to places that he/she has a legitimate right to be?

Would you argue that someone staying at a friends place for one or more days while travelling somehow disqualifies them from calling this their temporary residence but somehow staying in a hotel room doesn't? Thats kinda silly don't you think?

Frankly I'm surprised to hear you argue against this and lawful possesion in a place he had an obvious legitimate reason to have resided (temporarily).

I think the defendant would have a much better case had he not attempted to abandon the firearm (temporarily) in a public place than if he had not done so.

Actually, those would fit with my definition of a "contract of some sort".

A trailer has a title, so does a car. The contract can even be verbal...

Since the gf didn't come forward previously, leaving the assumption: there was no contract.

 

[jpk1md]

Actually, those would fit with my definition of a "contract of some sort".

A trailer has a title, so does a car. The contract can even be verbal...

Since the gf didn't come forward previously, leaving the assumption: there was no contract.

The mere fact that she's the GF is in and of itself a "Contract" of sorts even though I disagree entirely with your assertion that a "Contract" is required for Residency (Temp or Perm) to exist.

Would you call homeless non residents and therefore not entitled to the other rights and privs entitled to other residents of a State? Of course not.

 

[Kharn]

Before she moved in, my GF knew I was bringing a pistol to her place for a private exhibition every time I was going to spend the night. I was not on her lease so I wanted to make sure I was legal, but she got very tired of seeing the same pistol on the nightstand every weekend.

 

[Inigoes]

The mere fact that she's the GF is in and of itself a "Contract" of sorts even though I disagree entirely with your assertion that a "Contract" is required for Residency (Temp or Perm) to exist.

With a verbal contract, the other party has to affirm the agreement. Since she didn't, there was no agreement in the case.

Would you call homeless non residents and therefore not entitled to the other rights and privs entitled to other residents of a State? Of course not.

You are trying to tie resident with residence, which are different types of criteria for qualification.

 

[Kingjamez]

IBTL....

This is getting silly.

 

[jpk1md]

IBTL....

This is getting silly.

Agreed, the assertion that someone lacks the right to posess a firearm anywhere they may reside permanently or temporarily is absurd.

That the defendant attempted to hide a firearm in a public place where it could be found by anyone diminishes the credibility of the defendant in no small way

 

[Inigoes]

This is getting silly.

Not really,

If the gf comes forward, and say he lives there when he wishes (provided there is not rental or lease agreement prohibiting him).

This case would possess a whole new twist.

 

[jpk1md]

Not really,

If the gf comes forward,

So you're saying he would have to prove his innocence?

"Papers Please?"

In any case it won't change the case or improve his credibility as he chose to attempt to abandon the gun in public which is as much as an admission of guilt and demonstration that he believed that he was breaking the law (Rightful Law or Otherwise).

Thats an admission of guilt if I ever saw one.

 

[Inigoes]

So you're saying he would have to prove his innocence?

"Papers Please?"

Unfortunately, that's the current handgun law in MD.

You have to prove your innocence, just like driving while intoxicated (if you refuse a Breathalyzer, you're guilty).

 

[jpk1md]

Unfortunately, that's the current handgun law in MD.

Actually its your argument that I'm asserting is wrong and that the defendent would have been perfectly justified and legally in posession of said firearm at his GF;s which for all purposes was his temporary residence.

This is all water under the bridge as the defendent chose to abandon the firearm in a public place.