Open Carrying in Vehicle without a CHP (Concealed Handgun Permit) - STICKY

TFred said:

Today's Crime Report from the Fredericksburg Police Department.

It would be interesting to know the details on this one.

TFred

Bryan Berryman, 24, of Partlow, Virginia was arrested on a charge of concealing a firearm in an unsecured compartment. Berryman was released on a summons."

Click to expand...

TFred said:

Not sure this link will work. Looks like arraignment is next Thursday at 8:30 AM.

TFred

Click to expand...

user said:

...Thanks to TFred, I have that copy of the summons. I plan to get in touch with the defendant and see what he wants to do. Subject to his permission, I'll keep you posted.

Click to expand...

user said:

The interesting issue is one the local folks have apparently drawn from a recent case, Hodges v. Commonwealth, 64 Va. App. 687, 771 S.E.2d 693 (2015), in which a fed park ranger charged a guy with another charge (driving on suspended, I think) and searched the vehicle subject to the arrest. The guy had a handgun in a closed center console with a plastic cup over the handle of the gun. The Floyd Co. Circuit Judge said that was "evidence of intent to hide the gun" and found him guilty on the concealed weapon charge. The Ct. of Apps. said, well, the cop was unable to say whether or not the compartment was latched or not (which I interpret to mean whether or not the compartment was in fact closed), but what the appeal was about was whether the "secured in a container in the vehicle" exception was an element of the offense or an affirmative defense. Everybody agreed that if it was an element, then the Commonwealth loses, because it didn't prove that element, and that if an affirmative defense, then the Commonwealth wins, because the defendant didn't offer evidence on that issue. The Court held that the amendment to the statute was clearly intended to overrule a long series of judicial opinions and because of that the intent of the legislature was to change the law in a way that created a new element of the offense. The holding of the case had nothing to do with what the word, "latched", means in this context, or whether the gun was, in fact, secured in a container.

So, on what I've read at this point, someone charged the defendant in this case because his container was not "latched", as if Hodges had created a new reading on the statute. They do stuff like this, knowing perfectly well, the court did no such thing, just to make a defendant fund their attempt to nickel and dime the law to conform more to their liking. Experimenting on nonconsenting human subjects, in other words.

Click to expand...

user said:

The interesting issue is one the local folks have apparently drawn from a recent case, Hodges v. Commonwealth, 64 Va. App. 687, 771 S.E.2d 693 (2015), in which a fed park ranger charged a guy with another charge (driving on suspended, I think) and searched the vehicle subject to the arrest. The guy had a handgun in a closed center console with a plastic cup over the handle of the gun. The Floyd Co. Circuit Judge said that was "evidence of intent to hide the gun" and found him guilty on the concealed weapon charge. The Ct. of Apps. said, well, the cop was unable to say whether or not the compartment was latched or not (which I interpret to mean whether or not the compartment was in fact closed), but what the appeal was about was whether the "secured in a container in the vehicle" exception was an element of the offense or an affirmative defense. Everybody agreed that if it was an element, then the Commonwealth loses, because it didn't prove that element, and that if an affirmative defense, then the Commonwealth wins, because the defendant didn't offer evidence on that issue. The Court held that the amendment to the statute was clearly intended to overrule a long series of judicial opinions and because of that the intent of the legislature was to change the law in a way that created a new element of the offense. The holding of the case had nothing to do with what the word, "latched", means in this context, or whether the gun was, in fact, secured in a container.

So, on what I've read at this point, someone charged the defendant in this case because his container was not "latched", as if Hodges had created a new reading on the statute. They do stuff like this, knowing perfectly well, the court did no such thing, just to make a defendant fund their attempt to nickel and dime the law to conform more to their liking. Experimenting on nonconsenting human subjects, in other words.

Click to expand...

TFred said:

He's no stranger to the system!

Click to expand...

TFred said:

He's no stranger to the system!

Click to expand...

marshaul said:

It's rather disgraceful that a litany of petty traffic offenses can justify the above statement.

Click to expand...

Liberty-or-Death said:

TFred, I took it as a criticism of the system, that a series of mostly victimless traffic offenses would make one appear to be a terrible criminal with a lengthy record. But maybe I misread it.

Click to expand...

Liberty-or-Death said:

TFred, I took it as a criticism of the system, that a series of mostly victimless traffic offenses would make one appear to be a terrible criminal with a lengthy record. But maybe I misread it.

Click to expand...

longhorn005 said:

I'm new to the forum but I have a question about carrying in my truck. Its a single cab with a bench seat and there is a gap between the back of the driver side and middle seat, which is where I've been sticking the barrel of my gun. The gun is visible from the passenger side but not the driver side. Is this considered in pain (sic) view?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

IMO, yes it is legal open carry. It is the same as OCing on your right side in a holster which could not be seen from your left side by an observer. Similarly, if you were outside your vehicle an observer standing on the other side could not see your holstered handgun, but you are still said to be OCing. Same with strong side to the wall in a restaurant booth. It is not a consideration of where the observer is, but how you are carrying.

I am a little confused though - are you "holstering" the handgun in the upright/back portion of the seats? Are you left-hand dominate and that then is cross draw, shoulder rig position? I carry my BUG between the seat cushions, next to my right leg and very secure. It is literally a hand twitch away.

One must be careful that their clothing does not cover the gun - that then would be concealed and not legal w/o a CHP. You may also carry/transport in a console or glove compartment if you wish - it is not illegal even w/o a permit.
http://www.robertslaw.org/can-i-kee...d-glove-box-or-console-of-my-car-in-virginia/

Welcome to the forum, sir.

Click to expand...