Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Quick question about permit hearing rules -- who can file an appearance for town

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Quick question about permit hearing rules -- who can file an appearance for town

    Hi forum ....

    Does the town (issuing authority - your opposing party at a permit hearing) need to be represented by consul at the hearing?

    I thought in the last hearing I was at that only the police were there for several cases being heard ~ but a policeman cannot file an appearance as only pro se litigants and lawyers should be able to ...

    I would think that police are only witnesses at the hearing...the Board can certainly ask witnesses questions but the consuls should be the only ones who can call a witness to testify. I don't see the board having that authority under Chap 54 (4-177b or 4-177c) ... so a lawyer is needed to represent the town to call witnesses.


    Sec. 4-177b. Contested cases. Presiding officer. Subpoenas and production of documents. In a contested case, the presiding officer may administer oaths, take testimony under oath relative to the case, subpoena witnesses and require the production of records, physical evidence, papers and documents to any hearing held in the case. If any person disobeys the subpoena or, having appeared, refuses to answer any question put to him or to produce any records, physical evidence, papers and documents requested by the presiding officer, the agency may apply to the superior court for the judicial district of Hartford or for the judicial district in which the person resides, or to any judge of that court if it is not in session, setting forth the disobedience to the subpoena or refusal to answer or produce, and the court or judge shall cite the person to appear before the court or judge to show cause why the records, physical evidence, papers and documents should not be produced or why a question put to him should not be answered. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the agency or any party as otherwise allowed by law.

    Sec. 4-177c. Contested cases. Documents. Evidence. Arguments. Statements. (a) In a contested case, each party and the agency conducting the proceeding shall be afforded the opportunity (1) to inspect and copy relevant and material records, papers and documents not in the possession of the party or such agency, except as otherwise provided by federal law or any other provision of the general statutes, and (2) at a hearing, to respond, to cross-examine other parties, intervenors, and witnesses, and to present evidence and argument on all issues involved.

    (b) Persons not named as parties or intervenors may, in the discretion of the presiding officer, be given an opportunity to present oral or written statements. The presiding officer may require any such statement to be given under oath or affirmation.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 06-30-2012 at 02:38 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Hi forum ....

    Does the town (issuing authority - your opposing party at a permit hearing) need to be represented by consul at the hearing?
    No

    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Hi forum ....
    I thought in the last hearing I was at that only the police were there for several cases being heard ~ but a policeman cannot file an appearance as only pro se litigants and lawyers should be able to ...
    The police were there representing the local issuing authority. They can be the person responsible for the permits in the town or the police chief. If it's not the chief, then the chief sends someone with the authority to act on his behalf (which he can simply assign if he will not attend).

    They can send the town attorney, if they wish.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Hi forum ....


    I would think that police are only witnesses at the hearing...the Board can certainly ask witnesses questions but the consuls should be the only ones who can call a witness to testify. I don't see the board having that authority under Chap 54 (4-177b or 4-177c) ... so a lawyer is needed to represent the town to call witnesses.
    No, these are civil administrative hearings. Very different from a criminal court hearing. More similar to civil hearings. Witness testimony is also voluntary. Been a while since I read Chapter 54 in depth, but as I recall it deals with civil and criminal hearings. Not administrative hearings. In these civil administrative hearings, you (as you more than know) can appeal with the supreme court.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    . Been a while since I read Chapter 54 in depth, but as I recall it deals with civil and criminal hearings. Not administrative hearings. Jonathan
    Jon, Chapter 54 is exclusive to admin hearings ... CT PB deals with civil/criminal as well as CGS that mirrors the PB ..

    I don't think the police CAN represent the town .. must be a lawyer, like all judicial proceedings in this state ...I'll have to look some more ...


    CHAPTER 54*
    UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT

    http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap054.htm

    Me thinks that no one objects ...

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=en&as_sdt=4,7

    I have looked more into the role of the hearing officers and their ability to act as the absent party (lack of lawyer for the towns) ... they certainly cannot take on that role....from the case US v. Karnes (link above) sums it up best:

    ...A trial judge is not captive within the case as made by the parties.[2] He has the authority, if not the duty, to call witnesses who possess relevant information affecting the outcome of the issues when the parties decline to call them. But the due process clause requires that a court be impartial.[3] This impartiality is destroyed 217*217 when the court assumes the role of prosecutor and undertakes to produce evidence, essential to overcome the defendant...

    And the hearing officers actually make the judgement, there is no jury (as there was in the Karnes case - removing the judge from that direct role).

    So I will make such an objection if a cop wants to just walk up there and testify...it would at least leave the objection on the record for appeal. And the above case is for a regular judge ... a hearing officer only has authority that our legislature gives him & I don't see where our legislature gives hearing officers the expressed authority to call witnesses. The legislature gave them the opportunity to cross examine witnesses but I don't see any further authority to actually call witnesses.

    And hey, if I can win a case because of the processes involved favor a victory for me, I'm all for it ... towns have asked many times for dismissal motions regarding my cases ...
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 07-01-2012 at 10:29 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    I'm not seeing the link between your opening salvo on officers acting as lawyers and the judges role you copied here.

    Don't see much traction on this one. Will be interesting to watch..... but I really don't see this argument getting past a court appeal.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Don't see much traction on this one. Will be interesting to watch..... but I really don't see this argument getting past a court appeal.

    Jonathan
    Thanks for the input Jon, but I would still make this argument to keep it in the record for an appeal. Both the authority to call witnesses and the authority to act in the stead of a missing party...if you or I don't show up woould they act the same and be our advocate? uh, no.

  7. #7
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Thanks for the input Jon, but I would still make this argument to keep it in the record for an appeal.
    Understood, 'tis the reason for objections, no?

    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Both the authority to call witnesses and the authority to act in the stead of a missing party...if you or I don't show up woould they act the same and be our advocate? uh, no.
    Who's acting in stead of a missing party? If a party doesn't show up, on either side, they lose as long as the other party is present.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Interestingly, a cop at my local PD filed some documents in respect to my pending case. However, he did not file an appearance (or has anyone else besides myself) ... so I will be filing a motion to strike the filings as being legally insufficient.

    The filings also contain documents related to "suitability" to which I will also motion to strike - the board has already ruled with my questionnaire that these suitability questions are off-limits.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •