Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Peterson v. Martinez (10th Circuit) Rehearing, 1st Civil Appeals Case on "Bear" heard

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA

    Peterson v. Martinez (10th Circuit) Rehearing, 1st Civil Appeals Case on "Bear" heard


    I am pleased to announce the first civil carry case involving 2A issues (injury caused by denial of a completed application of a license to carry) to be reheard by a US Court of Appeals will be held on March 19, 2012, at 2PM at the Byron White US Courthouse in Denver, Colorado. The panel is United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. This decision will define the legal "bear" right within the jurisdiction of the 10th Circuit, which is made up of the states of Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah, Oklahoma, and Kansas.

    Click here for pertinent case information, including oral arguments, the district court decision that is being appealed for error, as well as case filings in the appeal.

    The players:

    Plaintiff is myself. Applied for a carry license from Denver (an OC banned city), was denied. Resident of a state which doesn't recognize Colorado, and none of my non-resident licenses can work in CO, and without open carry in Denver, cannot carry there at all.

    Defendants are Denver Manager of Safety Alex Martinez (ex-oficio Sheriff, issuer of carry licenses in Denver) and Colorado Department of Public Safety Director James Davis (reciprocity claim)

    Defendant-Intervenor is Colorado Attorney General John Suthers

    The Amici Curiae are:

    National Rifle Association's Civil Rights Defense Fund- Represented by Matthew Bower

    The Second Amendment Foundation & 17 State gun rights organizations- Represented by Alan Gura (of Heller & McDonald fame)

    The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence - will be represented by Jonathan Lowy.

    We previously argued the case on November 17th, but due to some confusion on it's part of the jurisdictional issues, the court was gracious enough to grant a rehearing and grant the amici argument time this go around.

    Attached is the asking of an enlargement of oral argument time by all amici curiae from 10 to 20 minutes.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Gray Peterson; 01-27-2012 at 10:45 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Wow, the judge was really grasping at straws to uphold the status quo. Of course, what should I expect from a University of Chicago judge appointed by Clinton? :-\
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Northwest Kent County, Michigan
    I'm watching this and other 'non-resident' cases with interest. As a long-term expatriate American, we are the ultimate non-residents (no legal State of residence).

Posting Permissions

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