You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride.

[eye95]

This case bears keeping an eye on it:

Man sues Fairfield judge, Butler County sheriff claiming violation of Constitutional rights

A Butler County man has filed a lawsuit against a municipal court judge and the county’s sheriff alleging his constitutional rights were violated after his arrest after a traffic stop.

www.journal-news.com

The article does not state what the alleged traffic infraction was or why the trooper felt the need to arrest the driver instead of simply citing him. I would’ve thought those facts would be pertinent.

We are left to wonder if these government agents aren’t handing out contempt of cop sentences of three to five days in jail without recourse. That the grand jury did not indict lends credence to this theory.

The article does mention that the victim had a CPL and a firearm in the trunk. It does not tie these facts in with the rest of the story.

 

[OC for ME]

Court records show Caddell was charged with driving under the influence, refusing sobriety tests, speeding and improper handling of a firearm. The charges were either ignored by a grand jury or withdrawn by prosecutors, the lawsuit says.

Lawsuit: Fairfield judge violated people's constitutional rights

Some people arrested in Fairfield, the lawsuit says, are jailed more than 48 hours – sometimes as long as five days –before they see the judge.

www.cincinnati.com

It will certainly be interesting to see if the judge's absolute immunity is pierced. Unlikely. Even if immunity is denied the consequences will be negligible for the judge. The city will see nothing more than a insurers check being written. The sheriff will enjoy QI because he cannot compel the judge to do her job.

 

[eye95]

Interesting that your article, with much of the same wording, mentions the charges, while mine does not. Poor editing on the part of the news outlet that I cited.

OVI and improper handing of a firearm are much more than traffic infractions. That these charges would be “ignored” or withdrawn leads me to believe that they were just piled on and had no real substance. Again, this sure is beginning to smell of contempt of cop with aggravating circumstances.

Thank you for posting the additional information.

 

[solus]

as oc for me points out, the judge will blame it on an administrative oversight, and this is the first time the jurist has heard about it, sorry the jurist will talk to the chief of courts or clerk about assuring a better policy is in place. , next case please!

Of course, the sheriff is off the hook cuz he cannot release those he puts in the system, now can he?

As for the differences, released 12+/- days apart.

Finally the articles stated, quote, ...The charges were either ignored by a grand jury or withdrawn by prosecutors, the lawsuit says unquote.

But the laywers are circling the ‘payday’ for the main event ~ class action suit.

 

[OC for ME]

The lawsuit notes that Caddell had firearms in the vehicle’s trunk but has a license to carry concealed weapons.

Not sure how you can...oh, never mind. My question answers itself.

 

[eye95]

If he was in fact drunk, he shouldn’t be carrying. However, I see no proof that he was drunk. (Likely the grand jury did not either.) Furthermore, how can one claim that “in the trunk” is carrying?

That’s precisely where I’d put my gun if I decided to have a beer!

 

[JustaShooter]

If he was in fact drunk, he shouldn’t be carrying. However, I see no proof that he was drunk. (Likely the grand jury did not either.) Furthermore, how can one claim that “in the trunk” is carrying?

That’s precisely where I’d put my gun if I decided to have a beer!

Even if placed in the trunk, if he failed to unload the firearm and was "under the influence" that would explain the "Improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle" charge. From ORC 2923.16:

(D) No person shall knowingly transport or have a loaded handgun in a motor vehicle if, at the time of that transportation or possession, any of the following applies:

(1) The person is under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of them.

 

[Deanimator]

If he was in fact drunk, he shouldn’t be carrying.

In Ohio, provided they (and any magazines, for good measure) were unloaded, he CAN'T. Probably explains why the charges fell flat.

As an Ohio CHL holder, I'm forbidden from consuming alcohol while CARRYING. This does not in ANY way apply to me if I buy a gun at a gunshow and stop for lunch and a beer on the way home with the gun and any ammunition locked in the trunk.

 

[OC for ME]

Does a Ohioan need a permit/license to OC?

 

[eye95]

No. But there are restrictions that amount to infringements on the Right.

Among them:

1. You can’t carry loaded in your vehicle.
2. You can’t carry in a Class D establishment, even if you are not drinking, even if it not posted. As soon as someone else takes a belt, the OCer becomes the criminal.
3. You can’t knowingly carry within 1000 ft of a school.

#1 makes unlicensed carry impractical.

I chose not to be licensed in Ohio for about six years. Then they made it stupidly simple (and free) for military retirees to obtain the license. So now I am licensed.

 

[solus]

Does a Ohioan need a permit/license to OC?

One side benefit OC for ME having a privilege card qualifies as an alternative to the background check requirements.

 

[OC for ME]

Do the statute language stipulate concealed carry or just carry regardless of manner. Is there case law that subverts the plain reading of the statute? I'll do the research, but the good citizens of Ohio probably have hashed these questions out a untold number of times and have a ready answer.

Thanks eye95 for the summary. I'll be maintaining a valid MO permit...just in case.

 

[eye95]

OC is legal in Ohio simply because it is not outlawed. CC is unlawful, with an exception built into the law for license holders.

The only case on point of which I have direct knowledge is Northrup v Toledo which essentially states that police may not even stop one (at least not lawfully) for the mere act of open carry. Others here, possibly CoL, probably have a larger cache of cases that come readily to mind.

Of course, there is also the case of Roy Call who received a settlement from the city of Riverside for having been unlawfully stopped, cuffed, and stuffed, for simply OCing. There is no legal ruling in Call’s case because he settled. However, the settlement is a de facto admission by the city that they cannot stop anyone for mere OC.

 

[OC for ME]

My error, regarding the armed and in a bar/restaurant. Does the statute explicitly state cc, or just plain ole armed regardless of manner. Then the case law question. Our gun laws state "while carrying concealed", OC is not concealed per the black letter of the law. We have no case law that I know of where a citizen got screwed because he was in a bar downing a brewski while OCing and charged with the carrying concealed while in a bar.

Also, drinking and carry is not a violation of the statutes. How you handle the firearm after a frosty friendly is the test, not mere carry. RSMo 571.030.1

 

[eye95]

Having a license is an exception to a general ban on carry in a bar—as long as one is not oneself imbibing and there is no sign prohibiting the carry.

Sorry if I misunderstood your question.

 

[OC for ME]

No worries. I bear the burden to be more precise when seeking enlightenment. Thanks for the clarification. Sucks it does for liberty minded individuals in Ohio, the elected reps not trusting the good citizens of Ohio. Perhaps the languange in RSMo 571 could be used as a resource for seeking change in Ohio.

 

[eye95]

Step one in Ohio is to simplify the law. It is so filled with exceptions to exceptions to exceptions that it took weeks to notice a misplaced exception that identified almost all long guns as “dangerous ordinances”!

That error occurred because BFA was trying to fix the lack of clarity on whether or not Shockwaves were shotguns under Ohio law, making them short-barreled shotguns and dangerous ordinances, or not.

The problem could have been solved with a single sentence: “If a term related to firearms is not defined in Ohio law, then the federal definition will be assumed.” Done. But, no, not our legislators. They have to make the law as complicated as is humanly possible.

 

[CJ4wd]

They have to make the law as complicated as is humanly possible.

Isn't that what lawyers and politicians routinely do?

 

[eye95]

Moreso in Ohio than in Alabama.

 

[BB62]

...As an Ohio CHL holder, I'm forbidden from consuming alcohol while CARRYING. ...

Just to put a fine point on it, and not to start a discussion/argument on the merits of doing so, in Ohio one is NOT forbidden to drink while carrying, one is forbidden to drink in alcohol serving establishments (with, I believe, one exception that I wouldn't think of challenging).