Question about previous record and pistol permit application

[Mrbowtie26]

Hello all I am new to the forum. I live in West Haven, Ct and am planning on applying for a pistol permit. I took the NRA class today and had some questions regarding the application. My previous record issues is as follows = I am currently 39 years old and in approx 1995 (23 yrs old) I was arrested for an altercation even though I was defending myself from someone. We both went to the courthouse at a later date and met with someone (a prosecutor maybe ? idk) and they aggreed that being the other person in the fight and I agreed that we were ok with each other the charges were dropped. I assume I should put on the application that I was arrested for this instance but am not totally sure. The next thing is in 1996 I was a bit of a speed freak lets say and got charged with reckless driving Too high of speed and failure to adhere to police officer signal. I went to court and I don't know at this time what the charges were dropped too but I lost my license for I believe 3 months. Now on the pistol permit they ask Have you ever been CONVICTED under the laws of this state, federal law or the laws of another jurisdiction. I don't know if they mean convicted of a felony, moving violations, etc so I am not sure what I should write down in that area being that it doesn't specify the typical conviocted of a felony. Thanks for any information or help/suggestions you can give to me. Oh and also does either of those previous issues eliminate me from getting the permit ?

Thanks
Ron H.

[Leverdude]

Get a copy of your record & see what it says.

[Mrbowtie26]

Get a copy of your record & see what it says.

Being that from what I understand it's an F.B.I. inquiry about my record and I was told everything will show up how, or where can I get my record ? I'll try to google it I guess. Thanks for the suggestion
Ron H.

[Leverdude]

If these things happened here then they should be on your CT record which you can get from your local PD for a fee. If they were in other states I'm not certain but you might be able to get it from the sate police. That said everything doesn't show up. If the charges were dropped for the fight that should be gone. The other thing might still be there depending on how it ended. But I don't think it'll stop you from getting a permit anyway. Of course I'm not a lawyer. But I know I got into trouble as a young man that did not show on my record, I even had a DWI, after which I did everything the state wanted and it didn't show up. Anyway try your PD, they should be able to give or sell you a copy.

[Rich B]

Email me your name, I think we can assist you.

rich@ctcarry.com

[Herr Heckler Koch]

I suggest the general principle of being forthright, that's better than having the state come back to you for an incomplete record/application.

[Mrbowtie26]

Email me your name, I think we can assist you.

rich@ctcarry.com

Rich I sent you my info.
Thanks
Ronald Anthony Haupler

[Mrbowtie26]

I was told by someone that the F.B.I. record could show things that the CT record won't show even though any previous issues would have been in CT. Not sure if thats accurate or not. I may just tell them everything I was just hoping it wouldnt cause a problem with W.H. pd approving the temporary.
Thanks
ROn H

[Leverdude]

I guess anything is possible. But I'd think the FBI check is looking for things not done here. At any rate my lawyer said I could say I had never been arrested, thats what I said and I had no trouble.

[IH8SPM]

I guess anything is possible. But I'd think the FBI check is looking for things not done here. At any rate my lawyer said I could say I had never been arrested, thats what I said and I had no trouble.

Your lawyer gave you that answer based on the circumstances surrounding your case. It is in OP interest to contact Rich B for help and get his own copy of both FBI and local record. When I applied for my Florida permit I was shocked to find out I had an unspecified court disposition on a case 20 years old. I was also told by my lawyer to always say it never happened. Thankfully I had ALL my dispositions ready to fax. I had to go as far as contacting the department of justice to have them send updates to the FBI. My point is if your sure check.

[davidmcbeth]

Your lawyer gave you that answer based on the circumstances surrounding your case. It is in OP interest to contact Rich B for help and get his own copy of both FBI and local record. When I applied for my Florida permit I was shocked to find out I had an unspecified court disposition on a case 20 years old. I was also told by my lawyer to always say it never happened. Thankfully I had ALL my dispositions ready to fax. I had to go as far as contacting the department of justice to have them send updates to the FBI. My point is if your sure check.

OP can check here: http://www.jud.ct.gov/jud2.htm

Really, I don't think its needed as long as it is not a crime that disqualifies you from owning a gun .... I don't see why we have to provide them with anything further than a statement(s) like when we purchase a gun.

[Rich B]

OP can check here: http://www.jud.ct.gov/jud2.htm

This will only show limited results for the last ten years.

Soon people will have complete access to the entire database, more on this later.

Really, I don't think its needed as long as it is not a crime that disqualifies you from owning a gun .... I don't see why we have to provide them with anything further than a statement(s) like when we purchase a gun.

I agree on principle, but one of the most common denial that goes in front of the BFPE is when someone doesn't answer truthfully to the 'have you ever been arrested' question.
That said, if the case is subject to erasure, you should not answer to it. The rub is in trying to find out what the status is. Hopefully we will be making that a lot easier to everyone in Connecticut very soon.

[Good Citizen]

if the case is subject to erasure, you should not answer to it.

Riches quote above is one of the most important aspects when presenting a case to the board of firearms examiners. If you mention an arrest that you don't have to you just put on record and are now responsible for being "interrogated", by the issuing authority & by the board about it, it is a "very loose" civil procedure, if you allow it, you have to be very careful.

You only have to disclose specifically what the applications says, if you disclose any arrests you will be making your own case for being “ not suitable”. They can dig around in your past all they want but the Connecticut statutes are clear about the use of erased information, it is off-limits to law enforcement. If you mention the arrest you are making your own case and putting it on record and screwing yourself over on your own permit application. If you never mention and they drag you to the board of firearms examiners, you can simply object and the information shouldn't be used against you, and if it is on appeal the judge would find that they aired in using that information against you…… Just don't mention anything, not required, this isn’t confession, especially a dismissed public fight on permit application that is like signing your own denial, depending on the climate (weather or not they abide by the law) of the individuals you're dealing with.

[KIX]

You guys are missing one VERY important fact.

If the original poster is applying for a permit in the same town as the offense, then he MAY have an issue.

An arrest is an arrest - period. I would like to work on legislation to get rid of this biased question on our application - but that's another story.

If he was arrested, and doesn't disclose it he can have a problem if the officer investigating the suitability of this applicant is aware of said arrest. It DOES NOT have to show up on your background check to be used in the hearing. These are civil administrative hearings with much more relaxed standards to arrive at SUITABILITY (Man I hate that word!).

So, not disclosing an arrest, can be seen as something you are trying to hide (potentially).

However, with the charges mentioned here, and the age of the offense, being honest about it would most likely be fine. The Chairman of the Board at the BFPE has said many times that simple offenses in males before we're 25 is often a developmental thing. With such a history of no issues, you'd have no problem just being honest (if it was even denied by the local issuing authority).

Jonathan

[Rich B]

An arrest is an arrest - period. I would like to work on legislation to get rid of this biased question on our application - but that's another story.

If he was arrested, and doesn't disclose it he can have a problem if the officer investigating the suitability of this applicant is aware of said arrest. It DOES NOT have to show up on your background check to be used in the hearing. These are civil administrative hearings with much more relaxed standards to arrive at SUITABILITY (Man I hate that word!).

(3) Any person who shall have been the subject of such an erasure shall be deemed to have never been arrested within the meaning of the general statutes with respect to the proceedings so erased and may so swear under oath.

We already have all the legislation we need. If the records were subject to erasure, the police would not have records and not be able to disclose them. If a denial is made, the appellant would still be perfectly within their rights to look the BFPE in the eyes and say they were not arrested.

Additionally, there is likely ground for a civil rights deprivation suit that the PD would be opening themselves up to should they choose to disclose publicly someone's erased history.

Erasure is erasure. Upon erasure, you were no longer arrested.

[brk913]

Erasure is erasure. Upon erasure, you were no longer arrested.

What Rich just said is 100% correct, even if the person was arrested by the officer doing his fingerprints and interview if the charges were erased pursuant to CT Law it is against the law for any custodian of such records to use or disclose this information.

[KIX]

And I'm telling you what I have witnessed.

The appellant can indeed say they weren't arrested by erasure statutes. Does not mean the town can not bring in an officer to recall what he knows FROM MEMORY.

I seem to recall recent case where this happened rather recently. If I can find it, I'll follow up.

I also recall a case that was erased when someone was fifteen. However, this appellant actually stole from the very PD where he was also an explorer, and it was all allowed.

Jonathan

[Rich B]

I also recall a case that was erased when someone was fifteen. However, this appellant actually stole from the very PD where he was also an explorer, and it was all allowed.

Until the appellant decides to hold them accountable.

[brk913]

Until the appellant decides to hold them accountable.

I know for a fact that if the officer relates information regarding an erased case they can be held both criminally and civilly liable for any damages. I worked with the Judicial Department for over 13 years dealing with probation, parole and juvenile records, I can't tell you how much it was drilled into our heads about disclosures of erased and/or sealed records...if the police are not getting this same info we did they are opening themselves up for some pretty expensive lawsuits...

[Rich B]

I know for a fact that if the officer relates information regarding an erased case they can be held both criminally and civilly liable for any damages.

Right. Witnessing someone get away with a crime is not the same as something being legal.

[davidmcbeth]

Perhaps he can answer the ?s with : I don't maintain nor am required to maintain such records; additionally, I am able to own handguns in the state.

[KIX]

Just relaying what I've witnessed more than once.

Never saw a lawsuit beyond that. Also, keep in mind, the Chairman of the Board of the BFPE is also a lead (I think, he does a lot of the heavy state murder cases) prosecutor. Given his experience, I wonder if there is some precedent he's working off of.

Also, remember, Even if Brian worked in the legal system, there is a pretty large difference between criminal and civil courts and law. These are civil administrative hearings at the BFPE.

Jonathan

[brk913]

there is a pretty large difference between criminal and civil courts and law. These are civil administrative hearings at the BFPE.
Jonathan

It does not matter what it is for, if it has been erased the information is non disclosable by CT law. This is the same situation I saw when Goldberg had to wait for his hearing to get his permit back, It was "revoked" for an arrest that was dismissed, the DPS knew they could not mention the arrest even thought they clearly knew about the incident and gave him back his permit the day of the hearing. I think it was Ed who wrote about this quandry the DPS was having about what to do knowing if they sent a representative in and the arrest was mentioned the person would be violating CT law....

[KIX]

If that's the case, then absolutely NOTHING was learned then. The practice still continues.

Jonathan

[brk913]

If that's the case, then absolutely NOTHING was learned then. The practice still continues.

Jonathan

It's a shame the person(s) did not hold the "reporting person" accountable for their illegal notifications. They should have objected during the hearing and quoted the erasure statute. They could also file a civil suit agaist the person who relayed the info and the department they work for.