Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: I am thinking about applying for my Handgun/Pistol Permit: Need Advice

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    06033
    Posts
    4

    I am thinking about applying for my Handgun/Pistol Permit: Need Advice

    Ever since I was a child, my goal was to apply and obtain my Handgun/Pistol Permit. My father has his permit ever since he became a Naturalized citizen of this country. Also, he taught my sister to shoot and respect firearms from an early age. As I grew into my teenage years, I made a few mistakes along the way. I was involved in an incident involving destruction of mailboxes and pleaded as a Youthful Offender. I also had an altercation with my father, and had to appear in court where the case was dismissed after talking with the prosecutor. I was also caught with marijuana, though no charges were ever filed. I admit, I was reckless and stupid. As I look back, I should have always listened to my parents when they said the past would one day find its way to the present.

    It has been over ten years since my last run in with the law and I have matured along the way. Life is a lot different than the years of my youth. I have come to point where I personally feel that I am responsible enough to pursue my Handgun/Pistol permit.

    Now, I am a bit wary as I prepare my completed application for the local authorities. I am especially concerned with the section asking for details of my arrest record. I am filing my application in the community where I committed all these acts. It has been ten years, but LEOS have an extremely good memory. Recently, I obtained a Criminal History Request from the state of CT and I had no hits according to their reply.

    From my understanding, I am legally allowed to say I have no arrest record, but I'm sure the LEO's at the police station would scoff when reading my application. I may be denied for lying as I have read in other forums. In addition, I understand under the suitability requirement I may be denied.

    How should I approach my situation? I know I am being honest in answering the questions required of the application, but I feel I have an up-hill battle awaiting me.

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    How old are you now?

    You can say you had arrests when you were a minor, but not as an adult. If the records are sealed, all the better. It's their job to prove you unsuitable, not your job to prove you are.

    Next, for youthful offenses, you'll be fine (well, as long as you have no felonies!). Then, they can sometimes be brought into question on suitability. But most likely those records are sealed as they usually are with minors.

    If you're adult life is totally clean, you have nothing to fear. If the local issuing authority tries to play any games, the BFPE will indeed still grant you your permit.

    I've seen worse go through and I attend all the BFPE hearings as an observer.

    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
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    06033
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    How old are you now?

    You can say you had arrests when you were a minor, but not as an adult. If the records are sealed, all the better. It's their job to prove you unsuitable, not your job to prove you are.

    Next, for youthful offenses, you'll be fine (well, as long as you have no felonies!). Then, they can sometimes be brought into question on suitability. But most likely those records are sealed as they usually are with minors.

    If you're adult life is totally clean, you have nothing to fear. If the local issuing authority tries to play any games, the BFPE will indeed still grant you your permit.

    I've seen worse go through and I attend all the BFPE hearings as an observer.

    Jonathan
    Hello Jonathan.

    Thanks for the quick reply. I am 27 years old now and my last run in with the law was when I was 17. My case as a youthful offender was not a felony and I have been clean ever since turning the age of majority. I just wanted to clarify something from what you said. So, I should put that I had arrests when I was a minor just to cover myself from lying on the application?

    Thanks again.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    I think before you do anything, you should call an attorney. Any money they may cost you now would be well worth it.

    My recommendations:

    Attorney Rachel Baird
    or
    Attorney Ralph Sherman

  5. #5
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    This one is rather clean cut though. None are felonies or disqualifiers and protected by youthful offender status.

    However, if you want to make doubly sure, Ralph Sherman may be the guy for this one as he handles more of these types of cases than any attorney in the state.

    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
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    This one is rather clean cut though.
    Nothing will ever be clean cut in this state until suitability is eliminated.

  7. #7
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Hey, I'm workin' on it brotha!

    But, since I've seen over a hundred cases get heard by this point, I think he'll be just fine.

    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
    Regular Member brk913's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Plainville, CT
    Posts
    370
    You do not need to list the arrests or outcome of any cases adjudicated under YOS and other diversionary progrmas (ARS, CSLP, AEP, etc...). It states it right on the application, if you put it down it will only hurt you as you will be "opening the can of worms". The PD knows they cannot use Juvenile cases (unless classified as a serious Juvenile offense) against you, if they do you would win on appeal.

  9. #9
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    The proper wording is:

    You are not required to disclose the existence of any arrest, criminal charge or conviction, the records of which have been erased pursuant to C.G.S. 46b-146, 54-76o, or 54-142a. If your criminal records have been erased pursuant to one of these statutes, you may swear under oath that you have never been arrested. Criminal records that may be erased are records pertaining to a finding of delinquency or that a child was a member of a family with service needs (C.G.S. 46b-146), an adjudication as a youthful offender (C.G.S. 54-76o), a criminal charge that has been dismissed or nolled, a criminal charge for which the person has been found not guilty, or a conviction for which the person received an absolute pardon (C.G.S. 54-142a).

    So, simply stated, find out if the records were erased pursuant to these statutes and being a juvenile.

    If that's the case - 'nuff said.

    I have seen officers come in to a hearing and say "I knew him when he was a juvenile, and he was trouble"....... as insane as that is. This is why (amongst other reasons) I want us to end suitability.

    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.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    06033
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    The proper wording is:


    I have seen officers come in to a hearing and say "I knew him when he was a juvenile, and he was trouble"....... as insane as that is. This is why (amongst other reasons) I want us to end suitability.

    Jonathan
    What has been your experience in regards to the outcome with those instances? Suitability is incredibly vague and doesn't allow for a standardized application of the law.

    At this point, I'll take my time with the process so that I can fully prepare for what may come my way.

    I have contacted one of the attorneys you recommended and will be in touch once they return in a couple of weeks.

  11. #11
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    The nice thing is I heard the board members say that your youth is your youth. You're not 22 either, 27 is almost a decade from your teen years with a clean record.

    The Chairman often brings up science about your mind not being fully developed until you are about 22 or 23 and such...... as long as the past is the past and you have a clean adult life, you'll do just fine.

    With the records check and knowing that you are clean should be good enough. I'd just check that the juvenile records were indeed expunged. With that, you are free to say no arrest and go from there.

    I think every case where someone was clean as an adult for at least ten or so years has been granted their permit. I can't think of a denial in the past year along those lines.

    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.

  12. #12
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    For the record, I've outlined the process on my website at:

    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com

    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.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by brk913 View Post
    You do not need to list the arrests or outcome of any cases adjudicated under YOS and other diversionary progrmas (ARS, CSLP, AEP, etc...). It states it right on the application, if you put it down it will only hurt you as you will be "opening the can of worms". The PD knows they cannot use Juvenile cases (unless classified as a serious Juvenile offense) against you, if they do you would win on appeal.
    I agree. I would not list any offenses not in the public record. I sure don't.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    06033
    Posts
    4
    Thanks to everyone for all the advice and information brought to this thread. I will definitely use all of this as I being the applications process.

    I'll keep you all update with my progress along the way.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    ct
    Posts
    7
    I can tell you from experience that if you have anything that happened once you turned 18 even if it's been expunged from your record you have to list it. My friend is a LEO and ran my record when I was applying. It came back clean. When I applied they turned up 2 misdemeanors from when I was 19 that had been sealed records.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by sgrindrod View Post
    When I applied they turned up 2 misdemeanors from when I was 19 that had been sealed records.
    And they used that against you? That seems to go against the rules of erasure.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    ct
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    And they used that against you? That seems to go against the rules of erasure.
    Yes. I had to explain them to the Chief of Police. It was quite embarrassing. They knew details above and beyond what the charges were.

  18. #18
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Was this because they "knew" you or because an arrest showed up when they ran your history?

    Really curious as I help people with the permit process and it would be handy to know.

    Thanx for the input!

    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.

  19. #19
    Regular Member brk913's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Plainville, CT
    Posts
    370
    I had a friend who had used AR try to buy a pistol back before you needed a permit to purchase. He waited the 2 weeks and wound up denied because the arrest showed on his record. He had to do a little running around to get his files from the court (Enfield is where records are) and they immediatley fixed it in the computer records (they have to as it is against state statute to disclose or discuss any case that has been dismissed via AR or any other diversionary program), after he did that he spoke with Jack at SLFU who authorized the gun store sell him the gun wiothout another 2 week wait. Even the court system makes mistakes sometimes but it is rare.

    Again, they cannot use anything related to an arrest if it was adjudicated via one of the exclusions listed on the application. If the PD used that against you and denied you the BOFPE would have ruled in your favor. Additionally you would not need to explain anything to the Chief of Police as once the records are fixed they would no longer see them and it is illegal for them to disclose it even if they see or know about it. As far as using it to claim you are not suitable, they cannot, it did not happen, no arrest, no conviction, no probation, no record, period. Remember this is the same issue the DPS ran into with Goldberg and why they returned his permit just prior to his hearing before the BOFPE, they could not use his arrest or even bring it up to use against him as a suitability issue as his case was dismissed and it would violate state statute or them to do so.

    All conviction records after 2000 are now online. You can run a CT check on yourself to see if you have any convictions on your record right off the Judicial website. If an AR or other diversionary program shows up ater it's dismissal date you should take care of it prior to applying. If you had something prior to 2000 you will need to run the $50 check through DPS to verify.

  20. #20
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by brk913 View Post
    Again, they cannot use anything related to an arrest if it was adjudicated via one of the exclusions listed on the application. If the PD used that against you and denied you the BOFPE would have ruled in your favor. Additionally you would not need to explain anything to the Chief of Police as once the records are fixed they would no longer see them and it is illegal for them to disclose it even if they see or know about it.
    Not totally true. If the officer that is doing the permit investigation knows of, or was involved with the original arrest, he can deny on that alone. Now, I'm not denying that it will be dropped at the BFPE hearing, but it can be discussed. It goes to character and the reason to end suitability. I have not only seen this happen at BFPE hearings, I saw it VERY recently at a hearing.

    Quote Originally Posted by brk913 View Post
    Remember this is the same issue the DPS ran into with Goldberg and why they returned his permit just prior to his hearing before the BOFPE, they could not use his arrest or even bring it up to use against him as a suitability issue as his case was dismissed and it would violate state statute or them to do so.
    Again, I've seen the discussions happen at hearings and that is just not the case. Goldberg didn't break a law, that was why he got his permit back. Nothing to do with the arrest or anything.

    I'm at these hearings every month, seen well over a 140 cases or so now and I've seen prior arrests, AR, juvenile, diversionary - whatever be brought up. There are several ways to open up that door during the hearing and they do get discussed.

    Where is it illegal to discuss this? Statute? Would be helpful in basing an argument on this in the future.

    Suitability must go..... period.

    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.

  21. #21
    Regular Member brk913's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Plainville, CT
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Where is it illegal to discuss this? Statute? Would be helpful in basing an argument on this in the future.
    Suitability or not they cannot use any information from an arrest that was adjuducated under the statutes you quoted yourself earlier in this thread, bringing up any of these incidents is a violation of the erasure statutes (I know, it's not like LEO follow the statutes anyway but they are supposed to), a civil suit can arise from the disclosure or discussion of such erased records, it's worded in the below statutes, ".:

    "Upon the entry of such an erasure order, all references including arrest, complaint, referrals, petitions, reports and orders, shall be removed from all agency, official and institutional files. The persons in charge of such records shall not disclose to any person, except the subject of the record, upon submission of satisfactory proof of the subject's identity in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the Chief Court Administrator, information pertaining to the record so erased."

    "Upon the entry of such an erasure order, all references including arrest, complaint, referrals, petitions, reports and orders, shall be removed from all agency, official and institutional files. The persons in charge of such records shall not disclose to any person, except the subject of the record, upon submission of satisfactory proof of the subject's identity in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the Chief Court Administrator, information pertaining to the record so erased. "

    "such records shall be deemed erased by operation of law and the clerk or the person charged with the retention and control of such records shall not disclose to anyone their existence or any information pertaining to any charge so erased"

    These above statement from the below statutes include the actual officer who made the arrest as well as court officers and all records departments. Just speaking about it is a violation of the statute even if it is just personal knowledge of the case. I worked for the Judicial Branch for 13 years in Parole, Bail and both Juvenile and Adult Probation, we are clearly instructed that once the erasure takes place we cannot speak of the erasure, the case, the arrest, the investigation or anything leading up to it.



    "Sec. 46b-146. (Formerly Sec. 51-327). Erasure of police and court records. Whenever any child has been convicted as delinquent, has been adjudicated a member of a family with service needs or has signed a statement of responsibility admitting to having committed a delinquent act, and has subsequently been discharged from the supervision of the Superior Court or from the custody of the Department of Children and Families or from the care of any other institution or agency to whom the child has been committed by the court, such child, or the child's parent or guardian, may file a petition with the Superior Court. If such court finds (1) that at least two years or, in the case of a child convicted as delinquent for the commission of a serious juvenile offense, four years have elapsed from the date of such discharge, (2) that no subsequent juvenile proceeding or adult criminal proceeding is pending against such child, (3) that such child has not been convicted of a delinquent act that would constitute a felony or misdemeanor if committed by an adult during such two-year or four-year period, (4) that such child has not been convicted as an adult of a felony or misdemeanor during such two-year or four-year period, and (5) that such child has reached eighteen years of age, the court shall order all police and court records pertaining to such child to be erased. Upon the entry of such an erasure order, all references including arrest, complaint, referrals, petitions, reports and orders, shall be removed from all agency, official and institutional files, and a finding of delinquency or that the child was a member of a family with service needs shall be deemed never to have occurred. The persons in charge of such records shall not disclose to any person information pertaining to the record so erased, except that the fact of such erasure may be substantiated where, in the opinion of the court, it is in the best interests of such child to do so. No child who has been the subject of such an erasure order shall be deemed to have been arrested ab initio, within the meaning of the general statutes, with respect to proceedings so erased. Copies of the erasure order shall be sent to all persons, agencies, officials or institutions known to have information pertaining to the delinquency or family with service needs proceedings affecting such child. Whenever a child is dismissed as not delinquent or as not being a member of a family with service needs, all police and court records pertaining to such charge shall be ordered erased immediately, without the filing of a petition. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the court from granting a petition to erase a child's records on a showing of good cause, after a hearing, before the time when such records could be erased."

    Sec. 54-76o. Erasure of police and court records of youthful offender. Whenever any person has been adjudicated a youthful offender and has subsequently been discharged from the supervision of the court or from the care of any institution or agency to whom he has been committed by the court, all police and court records pertaining to such youthful offender shall be automatically erased when such person attains twenty-one years of age, provided such person has not subsequent to being adjudged a youthful offender been convicted of a felony, as defined in section 53a-25, prior to attaining such age. Youthful offender status shall not be deemed conviction of a crime for the purposes of this section. Upon the entry of such an erasure order, all references including arrest, complaint, referrals, petitions, reports and orders, shall be removed from all agency, official and institutional files. The persons in charge of such records shall not disclose to any person, except the subject of the record, upon submission of satisfactory proof of the subject's identity in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the Chief Court Administrator, information pertaining to the record so erased. No youth who has been the subject of such an erasure order shall be deemed to have been arrested ab initio, within the meaning of the general statutes, with respect to proceedings so erased. Copies of the erasure order shall be sent to all persons, agencies, officials or institutions known to have information pertaining to the proceedings affecting such youth.

    Sec. 54-142a. (Formerly Sec. 54-90). Erasure of criminal records. (a) Whenever in any criminal case, on or after October 1, 1969, the accused, by a final judgment, is found not guilty of the charge or the charge is dismissed, all police and court records and records of any state's attorney pertaining to such charge shall be erased upon the expiration of the time to file a writ of error or take an appeal, if an appeal is not taken, or upon final determination of the appeal sustaining a finding of not guilty or a dismissal, if an appeal is taken. Nothing in this subsection shall require the erasure of any record pertaining to a charge for which the defendant was found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect or guilty but not criminally responsible by reason of mental disease or defect.

    (b) Whenever in any criminal case prior to October 1, 1969, the accused, by a final judgment, was found not guilty of the charge or the charge was dismissed, all police and court records and records of the state's or prosecuting attorney or the prosecuting grand juror pertaining to such charge shall be erased by operation of law and the clerk or Upon the entry of such an erasure order, all references including arrest, complaint, referrals, petitions, reports and orders, shall be removed from all agency, official and institutional files. The persons in charge of such records shall not disclose to any person, except the subject of the record, upon submission of satisfactory proof of the subject's identity in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the Chief Court Administrator, information pertaining to the record so erased. provided nothing in this subsection shall prohibit the arrested person or any one of his heirs from filing a petition for erasure with the court granting such not guilty judgment or dismissal, or, where the matter had been before a municipal court, a trial justice, the Circuit Court or the Court of Common Pleas with the records center of the Judicial Department and thereupon all police and court records and records of the state's attorney, prosecuting attorney or prosecuting grand juror pertaining to such charge shall be erased. Nothing in this subsection shall require the erasure of any record pertaining to a charge for which the defendant was found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect.

    (c) (1) Whenever any charge in a criminal case has been nolled in the Superior Court, or in the Court of Common Pleas, if at least thirteen months have elapsed since such nolle, all police and court records and records of the state's or prosecuting attorney or the prosecuting grand juror pertaining to such charge shall be erased, except that in cases of nolles entered in the Superior Court, Court of Common Pleas, Circuit Court, municipal court or by a justice of the peace prior to April 1, 1972, such records shall be deemed erased by operation of law and the clerk or the person charged with the retention and control of such records shall not disclose to anyone their existence or any information pertaining to any charge so erased, provided nothing in this subsection shall prohibit the arrested person or any one of his heirs from filing a petition to the court or to the records center of the Judicial Department, as the case may be, to have such records erased, in which case such records shall be erased.

    (2) Whenever any charge in a criminal case has been continued at the request of the prosecuting attorney, and a period of thirteen months has elapsed since the granting of such continuance during which period there has been no prosecution or other disposition of the matter, the charge shall be construed to have been nolled as of the date of termination of such thirteen-month period and such erasure may thereafter be effected or a petition filed therefor, as the case may be, as provided in this subsection for nolled cases.

    (d) (1) Whenever prior to October 1, 1974, any person who has been convicted of an offense in any court of this state has received an absolute pardon for such offense, such person or any one of his heirs may, at any time subsequent to such pardon, file a petition with the superior court at the location in which such conviction was effected, or with the superior court at the location having custody of the records of such conviction or with the records center of the Judicial Department if such conviction was in the Court of Common Pleas, Circuit Court, municipal court or by a trial justice court, for an order of erasure, and the Superior Court or records center of the Judicial Department shall direct all police and court records and records of the state's or prosecuting attorney pertaining to such case to be erased.

    (2) Whenever such absolute pardon was received on or after October 1, 1974, such records shall be erased.

    (e) (1) The clerk of the court or any person charged with retention and control of such records in the records center of the Judicial Department or any law enforcement agency having information contained in such erased records shall not disclose to anyone, except the subject of the record, upon submission pursuant to guidelines prescribed by the Office of the Chief Court Administrator of satisfactory proof of the subject's identity, information pertaining to any charge erased under any provision of this section and such clerk or person charged with the retention and control of such records shall forward a notice of such erasure to any law enforcement agency to which he knows information concerning the arrest has been disseminated and such disseminated information shall be erased from the records of such law enforcement agency. Such clerk or such person, as the case may be, shall provide adequate security measures to safeguard against unauthorized access to or dissemination of such records or upon the request of the accused cause the actual physical destruction of such records, except that such clerk or such person shall not cause the actual physical destruction of such records until three years have elapsed from the date of the final disposition of the criminal case to which such records pertain.

    (2) No fee shall be charged in any court with respect to any petition under this section.

    (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.

    (f) Upon motion properly brought, the court or a judge thereof, if such court is not in session, may order disclosure of such records (1) to a defendant in an action for false arrest arising out of the proceedings so erased, or (2) to the prosecuting attorney and defense counsel in connection with any perjury charges which the prosecutor alleges may have arisen from the testimony elicited during the trial. Such disclosure of such records is subject also to any records destruction program pursuant to which the records may have been destroyed. The jury charge in connection with erased offenses may be ordered by the judge for use by the judiciary, provided the names of the accused and the witnesses are omitted therefrom.

    (g) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any police or court records or the records of any state's attorney or prosecuting attorney with respect to any information or indictment containing more than one count (1) while the criminal case is pending, or (2) when the criminal case is disposed of unless and until all counts are entitled to erasure in accordance with the provisions of this section, except that when the criminal case is disposed of, electronic records or portions of electronic records released to the public that reference a charge that would otherwise be entitled to erasure under this section shall be erased in accordance with the provisions of this section. Nothing in this section shall require the erasure of any information contained in the registry of protective orders established pursuant to section 51-5c. For the purposes of this subsection, "electronic record" means any police or court record or the record of any state's attorney or prosecuting attorney that is an electronic record, as defined in section 1-267, or a computer printout.

    (h) For the purposes of this section, "court records" shall not include a record or transcript of the proceedings made or prepared by an official court reporter, assistant court reporter or monitor.

  22. #22
    Regular Member brk913's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Plainville, CT
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Goldberg didn't break a law, that was why he got his permit back. Nothing to do with the arrest or anything.
    Whether he broke the law or not is immaterial in this case, the DPS took his permit, they were basing it on his suitability due to an arrest that "did not happen". They could not send a representative into the BOFPE hearing and speak of it (it is a violation of state statute). That is why they returned his permit prior to his hearing, otherwise they would have looked really stupid when asked why they took his permit, by law they would have had to say, "I don't know."

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    ct
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Was this because they "knew" you or because an arrest showed up when they ran your history?

    Really curious as I help people with the permit process and it would be handy to know.

    Thanx for the input!

    Jonathan
    It was information that came up when they ran my history. I'm fairly new in town, so they don't know me at all.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    ct
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by sgrindrod View Post
    It was information that came up when they ran my history. I'm fairly new in town, so they don't know me at all.
    To give more of the story, I was initially denied based on these two misdemeanors from when I was 19 years old. I was able to meet with the chief and plead my case and thats when they hit me with the details of the cases. One of them was a sealed case because I had used my AR at that time. The details given were very specific. Technically neither of the charges are allowable reasons for a denial.

  25. #25
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    @BRK913

    I think int he confines of cyberspace, we might have missed something.... I wasn't disputing or wanting you to "prove" based on my not totally agreeing with you, it's a different area of law than where I'm heavily studying - specifically Volume 9, Chapter 529, sec. 29-27 through 29-38D. I specifically wanted information that can be of help to others in the future.

    For that, I say thanx!

    On the issue of what I've said previously, I wasn't saying from the perspective of "they can" (I agree, that is what I said)... I meant "they can" as THEY HAVE. This gives me heavy ammo in another section of criminal law that is indeed of help to many and I will indeed spread the word on this via my site. I think this info is INCREDIBLY valuable.

    I'm looking at it like I can point them to the statute, so when it is brought up, they now have a valid argument for an objection. Would be interesting to see how far that goes.

    For the record, BFPE is a civil proceeding, so they give a ton more leniency on how an argument can be structured (something I'm not in total agreement with, but it is what it is......).

    @sgrindrod - As stated above, you still should be fine and good to go. If you end up at a hearing, feel free to chat with me (and maybe even head out for a coffee). I'm the one guy that doesn't stand up when the oath is sworn in.

    I, of course hope, we don't need to meet under those circumstances and you get your permit.

    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.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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