Permit & Gun Returned Today & Full Incident Details

imported post

eye95 wrote:

GTL:  Have you read the details of my encounter?  (Holy ****, here in the Alabama forum)  Short of the detaining officer not physically assaulting me, I think the particulars of my case parallel St. John pretty closely also.

The city seemed to be willing to change its policy and practice, so I am disinclined to sue.  However, I am keeping my options open.

Do you think I'd have a case?

Click to expand...

I haven't read your account. If you send me a link, I will have a look.

imported post

GunTotingLawyer wrote:

eye95 wrote:

GTL: Have you read the details of my encounter? (Holy ****, here in the Alabama forum) Short of the detaining officer not physically assaulting me, I think the particulars of my case parallel St. John pretty closely also.

The city seemed to be willing to change its policy and practice, so I am disinclined to sue. However, I am keeping my options open.

Do you think I'd have a case?

Click to expand...

I haven't read your account. If you send me a link, I will have a look.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't realize that it had dropped off the home page.

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum59/42682.html

imported post

eye95 wrote:

St. John v. Alamogordo is about police doing an illegal search and seizure just because a person was legally OCing. How would that case affect a case in Alabama? Some have said that, since Alabama and New Mexico are in different federal appeals circuits, that St. John would be of no significance.

Click to expand...

I'm sure I'm not as persuasive as a real lawyer, but I just wanted to point out a very simple answer to eye's question.

Article IV, Section 1, US Constitution:

Each State to Honor all others

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. (emphasis mine)

Click to expand...

Seems pretty clear cut to me.:celebrate

imported post

mcdonalk wrote:

I'm sure I'm not as persuasive as a real lawyer, but I just wanted to point out a very simple answer to eye's question.

Article IV, Section 1, US Constitution:

Each State to Honor all others

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. (emphasis mine)

Click to expand...

Seems pretty clear cut to me.:celebrate

Click to expand...

The full faith and credit clause is a confusing portion of the Constitution that does not mean what many people think it means. Court decisions making decisions of law are not binding on courts not subservient thereto. In other words, a federal court in New Mexico cannot make binding law that must be followed by a court in Alabama.

The full faith and credit clause requires, for example, that California must recognize a divorce decree by a court in New York so long as it is proper.

Our federal court system exists to (as relevant to this discussion) adjudicate issues arising under federal law. Accordingly, when there is an allegation ofa violation of constitutional rights, federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction (i.e. - control over the litigation). They are arranged by district at the trial level, then by circuit at the appeals level. Finally, the Supreme Court is the last stop on the appeals train. Circuit courts comprise multiple districts and create decisions of law that are binding only on the district courts below them. In other words, a district court in California cannot make a decision that directly contradicts a decision by the Ninth Circuit court of appeals since California is in the Ninth Circuit.


This link should provide a helpful illustration: http://www.uscourts.gov/court_locator.aspx

imported post

Just dropping by for a quick second! I noticed "GunTotingLawyer" had posted, and I read with interest.

GTL, I'd like to sincerely thank you for taking the time to explain some basic court and legal procedural principals to the forum members. Contributors such as yourself, along with the other highly capable and well read members are what make this forum, as well as Opencarry.org, such a valuable educational resource. This site encompasses SO MUCH more than simply open carry, and it is a truly valuable resource for anyone with an interest in the principles that provide the backdrop for freedom and liberty.

Don't want to derail the tread, just wanted drop by and say THANK YOU to all!

imported post

ParaWarthog wrote:

Just dropping by for a quick second! I noticed "GunTotingLawyer" had posted, and I read with interest.

GTL, I'd like to sincerely thank you for taking the time to explain some basic court and legal procedural principals to the forum members. Contributors such as yourself, along with the other highly capable and well read members are what make this forum, as well as Opencarry.org, such a valuable educational resource. This site encompasses SO MUCH more than simply open carry, and it is a truly valuable resource for anyone with an interest in the principles that provide the backdrop for freedom and liberty.

Don't want to derail the tread, just wanted drop by and say THANK YOU to all!

Click to expand...

+1

I love how no matter how wrong my thinking may be there is someone knowledgeable enough to put me on the right path. I'm so glad I found this site. =)

imported post

UncleWolfie wrote:

The bullet that's missing was likely fired from your pistol in order to 'finger print' it for future reference. If your pistol is ever used in a crime they have a round fired from it and will be able to match them up.

I would consider selling that firearm, using a different type of ammunition from here forward, or both.

Police reports are public record. Anyone can request a copy of any report for a small copy fee. You were lied to when you were told that because you were listed as a 'suspect' on the report you were not allowed a copy absent a lawyer. Utter B.S.

You really should sue these b******s. You'll have to show damages.

The theft and use of your property (stolen bullet, used your firearm without your consent) absent your consent or a valid search warrant might meet that standard.

They violated your Fourth Amendment Right to be free from unreasonable search and seizures. This includes the first encounter in the restaurant as well as their subsequent behavior after taking your property without consent.

Click to expand...

I wonder if a court would consider a new match barrel as legitimate damages.

Either way it would be amusing to pick up my pistol from the property officer, strip it, replace the barrel, and leave the "finger-printed" barrel on the counter and stroll out.

imported post

eye95 wrote:

GunTotingLawyer wrote:

eye95 wrote:

GTL: Have you read the details of my encounter? (Holy ****, here in the Alabama forum) Short of the detaining officer not physically assaulting me, I think the particulars of my case parallel St. John pretty closely also.

The city seemed to be willing to change its policy and practice, so I am disinclined to sue. However, I am keeping my options open.

Do you think I'd have a case?

Click to expand...

I haven't read your account. If you send me a link, I will have a look.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't realize that it had dropped off the home page.

Dianosisactually had his weapon taken and there is circumstantial evidence that they continued the illegal search on his property by "fingerprinting" it.

You do have a case though and I encourage everyone to pursue their civil rights zealously within the boundaries of their comfort. For some, this means that they will write a letter and be done with it. For others, they will not be satisfied until they have a public judgement from a court. It is up to you but as I understand it, you have already made a difference with your response which is a great thing for all of us.

Click to expand...

imported post

ParaWarthog wrote:

GTL, I'd like to sincerely thank you for taking the time to explain some basic court and legal procedural principals to the forum members.

Click to expand...

Well thanks for the thanks. This is what I do and what I find interesting. I would love to educate everyone who wants to be educated on constitutional principles. Feel free to send out questions whenever you have them. I have already started to invade other boards here with my unsolicited interruptions.

While I am at it, I have to plug the discussion that is going on over at the CT board. Check out http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum14/44957.htmlif you have the time. We are discussing an incident similar to this one that resulted in the opencarrier being handcuffed and subject to an untruthful LEO. Things are really heating up lately. This is exciting.

imported post

This is what I do and what I find interesting. I would love to educate everyone who wants to be educated on constitutional principles. Feel free to send out questions whenever you have them.

Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer, but I find court opinions interesting too.

In reading those opinions, I often see references in Alabama aswell as 11th Circuitopinionsto cases decidedin other regions (circuits) of the USA supporting contitutional principles such as those addressed in St. John v Alamogordo. I don't understand yourinference that St. John is not significant in Alabama courts. How can constitutional principles, especially US Constitutional principles, in New Mexico not be significant in Alabama? I've see many examples where such opinions andarguments are given significant consideration and weight in our courts, even if they are not "binding". How else could our courts keep from being inconsistent in their rulings on fundamental rights?

imported post

49er wrote:

This is what I do and what I find interesting. I would love to educate everyone who wants to be educated on constitutional principles. Feel free to send out questions whenever you have them.

Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer, but I find court opinions interesting too.

In reading those opinions, I often see references in Alabama aswell as 11th Circuitopinionsto cases decidedin other regions (circuits) of the USA supporting contitutional principles such as those addressed in St. John v Alamogordo. I don't understand yourinference that St. John is not significant in Alabama courts. How can constitutional principles, especially US Constitutional principles, in New Mexico not be significant in Alabama? I've see many examples where such opinions andarguments are given significant consideration and weight in our courts, even if they are not "binding". How else could our courts keep from being inconsistent in their rulings on fundamental rights?

Click to expand...

+1. As I see it, the Federal Court overseeing Alabama, could rule differently than the Court over New Mexico, but that willonly set the stage for an appeal to SCOTUS, especially if the NM ruling is consistant with prior SCOTUS rulings and the Alabama ruling steps off in a different direction.

imported post

49er wrote:

In reading those opinions, I often see references in Alabama aswell as11th Circuitopinionsto cases decidedin other regions (circuits) of the USA supporting contitutional principles such as those addressed in St. John v Alamogordo. I don't understand yourinference that St. John is not significant in Alabama courts. How can constitutional principles, especially US Constitutional principles, in New Mexico not be significant in Alabama? I've see many examples where such opinions andarguments are given significant consideration and weight in our courts, even if they are not "binding". How else could our courts keep from being inconsistent in their rulings on fundamental rights?

Click to expand...

I did not mean to imply that the St. John case would not be "significant" in an Alabama federal court. In fact, there is no such legal principle as "significance" when it comes to case law. What I did mean (and what I said) is that any case law that does not come either the Supreme Court or the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals is merely persuasive. Those two courts are the only federal appeals courts that have authority over district courts in the 10th circuit.

The concept of case law "binding" another court comes from the concept of appellate authority. You cannot overrule courts above and are only "bound" by decisions coming from courts above. Since all district courts are on the same level and there are 14 federal circuits, there is, in fact, quite a lot of inconsistency in federal law.

imported post

JohnH wrote:

As I see it, the Federal Court overseeing Alabama, could rule differently than the Court over New Mexico, but that willonly set the stage for an appeal to SCOTUS, especially if the NM ruling is consistant with prior SCOTUS rulings and the Alabama ruling steps off in a different direction.

Click to expand...

First principles - Decisions by federal district courts are appealed to circuit courts of appeals. This appeal is a right. In other words, the appeals court must take up your plea for appeal so long as you follow the right procedure. You always get at least these two bites at the apple. The Supreme Court is allowed (by statute) to choose which cases it wants to hear (except in cases where a state is a party in which case it has exclusive and original jurisdiction -- this is in the constitution). When someone wants the Supreme Court to reverse a decision from an appeals court, he must file a paper with the Court called a "petition for writ of certiorari." This is a fancy way of saying "please take up my case." If the Court agrees (current practice is 4 out of 9 justices) to hear the case, it orders a "writ of certiorari" to the appeals court telling it to certify its records and send them to the Court.

With that out of the way . . .

Differences in opinion between district courts do not trigger the Supreme Court from taking up a case as discussed above. You have to go through the appeals process first and then petition the Court to hear your case. Generally, the Court will take up cases that present significant issues of constitutionality (i.e. the Miranda case) or cases where the circuit courts are split on an issue. This is called a "circuit split."

In this case, there would only be a circuit split if both the 10th and 11th circuit courts of appeals heard cases where the question was the same (i.e. does open possession of a pistol in a state where it is not illegal provide RAS for a stop) and they came to different conclusions. As observed by the poster above -- this system does result in inconsistencies in the application of federal law.

imported post

"... Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding, and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense..." Thomas Jefferson

Click to expand...

I was using ordinarylanguageand not a legal term when Iused the word "significance". I'm not a lawyer... I speak English.

imported post

49er wrote:

I'm not a lawyer... I speak English.

Click to expand...

Well played and good point. Unfortunately for Jefferson, he never could have imagined what we have done with the precious gift of the Republic that he and others left for us.

imported post

GunTotingLawyer wrote:

49er wrote:

I'm not a lawyer... I speak English.

Click to expand...

Well played and good point. Unfortunately for Jefferson, he never could have imagined what we have done with the precious gift of the Republic that he and others left for us.

Click to expand...

We convinced everyone that it was a democracy and then fell into the precise trap that the Founders predicted that a democracy would fall into!