Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

33. Bear Arms, 2nd Am.

State v. Norris W. Culver, 2018 WI App 55; case activity (including briefs) Wisconsin Stat. § 942.09(3m)(a)2. prohibits a person from posting or publishing “private representations” without the consent of the person depicted in the representation. The court of appeals rejects Culver’s claim that the statute is void because it’s overbroad and vague. The court also… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Question presented: Whether a guilty plea inherently waives a defendant’s right to challenge the constitutionality of his statute of conviction? Lower court opinion: United States v. Class (unreported) (D.C. Cir. 2016) Docket Scotusblog page Though this is an appeal of a federal prosecution, it may well affect state practice. We’re all familiar with the general rule… Read More

{ 0 comments }

The brief answer from two recent federal court decisions is “yes,” though the devil, as they say, is in the details. The first decision, from a highly fractured en banc panel of the Third Circuit, involves persons convicted of a misdemeanor punishable by more than one year, who are banned from possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. §§ 921(a)(20)(B)… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Voisine v. United States, USSC No. 14-10154, 2016 WL 3461559, 579 U.S. ___ (June 27, 2016), affirming United States v. Voisine, 778 F.3d 176 (1st Cir. 2015); Scotusblog page (includes links to briefs and commentary) Federal law prohibits any person convicted of a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” from possessing a firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)… Read More

{ 1 comment }

Village of Somerset v. Mark J. Hoffman, 2015AP140, District 3, 5/17/16 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Viewed through the interpretive prism mandated by § 66.0409(6), a local ordinance prohibiting “wander[ing] or stroll[ing] in an aimless manner” that is “not usual for law abiding individuals under circumstances that warrant alarm for the safety of persons”… Read More

{ 0 comments }

SCOTUS: 2nd Amendment extends to stun guns

Jaime Caetano v. Massachusetts, USSC No. 14-10078, 2016WL1078932 (per curiam), vacating Commonwealth v. Caetano, 470 Mass. 774, 26 N.E.2d 688 (2015); SCOTUSblog page (including links to briefs and commentary) Jaime Caetano obtained a stun gun in order to protect herself from an abusive boyfriend. When she was prosecuted for violating a Massachusetts statute that prohibited the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Tempest Horsley v. Jessica Trame, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 14-2846, 12/14/15 Illinois law requires a person over the age of 18 but under the age of 21 to get a parent’s or guardian signature on an application for a firearm owner’s identification (FOID) card, which is generally necessary to lawfully possess or… Read More

{ 0 comments }

The court of appeals’ decision in State v. Herrmann, which held that Wisconsin’s switchblade prohibition can’t be applied to a possession in a person’s home, has been attracting attention around the World Wide Web. Jurist’s Paper Chase has a news item. The Volokh Conspiracy has a post, and some sites focused on the right to keep and bear… Read More

{ 0 comments }