PDA

View Full Version : Just in Time for Christmas . . . Yet Another Win for The Calguns Foundation!


oaklander
12-23-2009, 6:29 PM
12/23/2009

In September 2009, the CGF received an urgent call from a young man who was arrested by Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department deputies in the Long Beach area for violation of Penal Code section 12025 (a) – i.e., carrying a concealed pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in his vehicle.

However, there were two major problems with this arrest:

First, the Department of Justice website states: Nonconcealable firearms (rifles and shotguns) are not generally covered within the provisions of California Penal Code section 12025 and therefore are not required to be transported in a locked container. (See http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/travel.php).

And, second, the firearms prohibited from being concealed according to Penal Code section 12025 are defined as handguns under California law:

As used in this title, the term "handgun" means any "pistol," "revolver," or "firearm capable of being concealed upon the person." (PC 12001(a)(2).)

According to the police report, the 19 year-old Cal State University Long Beach college student, and two of his friends were in a Long Beach industrial area late at night performing experiments with legal compressed air devices.

When they were done for the night and leaving the area, they were pulled over by multiple Los Angeles Sheriff’s units, who ordered them out of the student’s pickup truck at gun point, cuffed them, and searched the truck. The deputies then told the student that they were responding to a “shots fired” complaint and asked him if he had a firearm in the vehicle.

He informed the LASD deputies that he had a shotgun in the cab, a Mossberg 500, which was unloaded and under the seat. He had no ammunition and informed the deputies as much. The deputies then asked him how many rounds he had fired through it that night, the student explained that caller must have heard the noise from the experiments, showed the deputy the legal device used in the experiments, and informed them that he and his friends were not firing the shotgun.

The bottom line is that the LASD took him to the station, with the shotgun, held him until morning, cited him for concealed carry with a court date in Compton and released him on his own recognizance. They kept the shotgun as “evidence.”

Upon contacting The Calguns Foundation, Inc. (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/) and explaining the situation, the CGF Board unanimously agreed to fund the student’s criminal defense and retained Jason Davis of Davis & Associates (http://www.calgunlawyers.com/Davis_%26_Associates/Home.html) to represent him.

At the initial arraignment, Mr. Davis contacted the Deputy District Attorney and explained that Penal Code section 12025 does not apply to long guns (such as shotguns) . . . unless they are “short barreled.”

The Deputy District Attorney seized upon the fact that the language does not clearly eliminate application to shotguns.

And in addition, the District Attorney informed Mr. Davis that they would add another count of 12025 for possession of the “compressed air” device if Mr. Davis persisted in attempting to defend this case.

Mr. Davis not only persisted but informed the District Attorney’s office that they were not only wrong on the shotgun, but wrong on the “compressed air device” as well.

A “compressed air” device simply cannot be deemed a firearm under Penal Code section 12001, which requires a device to expel a projectile through an explosion or other form of combustion. Mr. Davis advised the District Attorney’s office to take another careful look at the charges and reconsider dismissing the complaint.

The arraignment was then postponed, and no additional counts were brought.

At the second arraignment date, Mr. Davis provided the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office with hundreds of pages of information in support of the common sense position that the terms “handgun,” “pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person” simply do not include shotguns. Mr. Davis even included a copy of the entire “dangerous weapons law” with each and every occurrence of the terms “handgun,” “pistol,” “revolver,” and “other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person,” highlighted in yellow so as to demonstrate the absurdity of the position that a standard shotguns is the same as a “handgun,”

This crazy position would require shotguns to be placed on the list of handguns deemed not unsafe and require a handgun safety certificate for the purchase of shotguns.

At this point the matter was escalated to a higher level Deputy District Attorney, presumably one who is not pre-programmed to think all firearms and the persons possessing them are bad. Unfortunately, this was not the case. The first words out of the new Deputy District Attorney’s mouth were, “Do you want your client to be prosecuted with a felony?”

Clearly, this comment was a threat aimed at Mr. Davis’ challenge to the DA’s position. At this point, Mr. Davis continued to challenge the merits of their case and explained the documents that he provided to them. The arraignment was continued again to allow the Deputy District Attorney to digest the information provided.

Last Friday, at the third arraignment date, the Deputy District Attorney took the position that the law is not clear and may well include long guns – but stated that they could not proceed on the facts.

At that time, Mr. Davis made his motion to the court to dismiss the Complaint prior to arraignment and the Court granted that motion. Case dismissed!

Now Mr. Davis and the client are working on getting his firearm returned. CGF will keep you updated as to those results!

-Kevin.

Click here to donate to CGF:
GUNPAL: https://www.gunpal.net/images/buttons/gunpal_donate_v1.png (https://www.gunpal.net/gp?req=xpress&hbid=0000000001086101)

PAYPAL: https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif (https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6137065)
-Ben Cannon, Treasurer, CGF.

Maltese Falcon
12-23-2009, 6:34 PM
Good job CGF....Fight fire with Fire!

wildhawker
12-23-2009, 6:36 PM
Another CGF/Davis win for the good guys - well done gents!

Gio
12-23-2009, 6:40 PM
Good news! Thanks CGN Foundation!!!!!!

-Gio

383green
12-23-2009, 6:44 PM
It disturbs me that the prosecutor threatened the defendant with additional charges for having the audacity to defend himself in court. :mad:

Three cheers for CGF and Mr. Davis! Hooray for the defendant, for calling The Right People for his defense! :thumbsup:

And a big ol' stink-eye to LASD and the DAs for being such jerks! :p

mister dize
12-23-2009, 6:45 PM
Excellent! Let's hope he gets his Mossberg back right quick. They should clean & oil it for him :D

Ducman
12-23-2009, 6:47 PM
Great News! Thanks CGF .

Werewolf1021
12-23-2009, 6:47 PM
I love it. Good job CGF!

But you gotta love the DA "If you challenge my authoritah, I will strong-arm you into compliance."

Paratus et Vigilans
12-23-2009, 6:47 PM
Good job, Jason! I was the Calgunner's first point of contact on this matter and I'm really pleased to see this coming to such a positive conclusion for him.

Sad state of affairs that we have so many people on the public payroll who threaten first and think second. Perhaps a complaint to the State Bar might be in order as well. Put the accuser in the position of the accused. Perhaps that will inhibit such cavalier conduct in the future.

Hopi
12-23-2009, 6:50 PM
Great job CGF!!!





and for this

Unfortunately, this was not the case. The first words out of the new Deputy District Attorney’s mouth were, “Do you want your client to be prosecuted with a felony?”




There isn't a sentence that i will be able complete without serious intervention by the word filter.......

Vtec44
12-23-2009, 6:51 PM
Awesome!!!

bambam8d1
12-23-2009, 6:53 PM
It disturbs me that the prosecutor threatened the defendant with additional charges for having the audacity to defend himself in court. :mad:

Three cheers for CGF and Mr. Davis! Hooray for the defendant, for calling The Right People for his defense! :thumbsup:

And a big ol' stink-eye to LASD and the DAs for being such jerks! :p

Agree... I cant believe they were trying to threaten him for trying to defend himself..
Good job CGF

wildhawker
12-23-2009, 6:54 PM
Indeed, Paratus et Vigilans.

anthonyca
12-23-2009, 6:55 PM
Great job. They must have been shocked when Mr. Davis didn't fold when they threatened a felony.

BigBamBoo
12-23-2009, 6:55 PM
...........

MonsterMan
12-23-2009, 7:04 PM
You guys are awesome!! Great job Jason! Now hopefully they give him his shotgun back in a timely manner.

:)

G-Man WC
12-23-2009, 7:05 PM
Nice going CGF. -g

McCrown
12-23-2009, 7:15 PM
Nice, another win for the good guy!

vantec08
12-23-2009, 7:22 PM
thank God & greyhound for CGF!

cortayack
12-23-2009, 7:28 PM
[QUOTE=383green;3538982]It disturbs me that the prosecutor threatened the defendant with additional charges for having the audacity to defend himself in court. :mad:


Yea....because you are automaticly guilty until proven innocent. Happy to read a happy ending.....

IrishPirate
12-23-2009, 7:28 PM
wow...what would have been gained by the DA pursuing this? what a-holes! glad to see common sense from the judge prevailed.

GrizzlyGuy
12-23-2009, 7:29 PM
Wow, great job you guys!

These two aspects really tick me off:

And in addition, the District Attorney informed Mr. Davis that they would add another count of 12025 for possession of the “compressed air” device if Mr. Davis persisted in attempting to defend this case.


The first words out of the new Deputy District Attorney’s mouth were, “Do you want your client to be prosecuted with a felony?”

The last time I checked, 6A still lists "to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence" as a right, and I can't remember any powers granted to government allowing them to take retribution against you when you exercise that right :mad:

bigcalidave
12-23-2009, 7:29 PM
Great work CGF !!

pullnshoot25
12-23-2009, 7:30 PM
CGF FTMFW! HOLY CRAP!

I can't believe that these people are so WILLING to be IGNORANT! What is even more disturbing is the willingness to ruin a young guy's life on non-criminal activities! It is quite sickening and disturbing, to say the least.

The geek in me wants to know what is up with the compressed air devices. The guy must be an engineering student of sorts.

cortayack
12-23-2009, 7:33 PM
Got to LOL at the statement the Deputy District Attorney made after he new he losted "took the position that the law is not clear and may well include long guns – but stated that they could not proceed on the facts." Hes an anti.......

RRangel
12-23-2009, 7:35 PM
My congratulations to the Calguns Foundation and Jason Davis for a job well done. Today the reality is that our rights are blatantly infringed by misguided and even not so misguided legislators.

They don't think twice about the burdens they place on citizens, and the ramifications in the form of abuse that citizens must bear because of rogues who are more than willing to distort already bad laws for the worse. It's like complete amateur hour at LA County, and likely worse than that in this case, to our detriment.

The actions by these deputy district attorneys and the arresting officers who should know better are contemptible. They reflect poorly on the good people who actually serve the public.

Most would not believe it were it not for this post. Situations like this make you wonder how these public servants have made it so far. To think that we have such honest and caring people serving at the tax payers expense is very disturbing.

Still, the future is very bright. It's like the stars are aligning for gun owners in California.

Purple K
12-23-2009, 7:36 PM
Jason Davis AKA Pit Bull. The names of those Deputy DA's should be well publicized. How can they be trusted to enforce the law if they don't understand the law. What other legal concepts, besides gun law, are they deficient on.

Theseus
12-23-2009, 7:38 PM
Just wow! Congratulations!

racky
12-23-2009, 7:41 PM
woot! :clap:

bodger
12-23-2009, 7:46 PM
Excellent, well done.

Amusing statement from that DA. He can't proceed on the facts. No, because they obviously demonstrate that no crime was committed.
Imagine what would have happened to this gunny without a good lawyer. Frightening.

GrizzlyGuy
12-23-2009, 7:47 PM
There isn't a sentence that i will be able complete without serious intervention by the word filter.......

Yup, and folks who live down in the LA area should consider complaining to the DA. Here is his web site (http://da.co.la.ca.us/history/cooley.htm):

The District Attorney has been relentless in his pursuit of public corruption and of lawbreakers within the justice system. He created the Public Integrity Division that has prosecuted politicians whose misconduct had gone unpunished for years. For his work in this area and others, Mr. Cooley and LADA have received numerous awards and commendations. He also formed the Justice System Integrity Division, which holds judges, attorneys, police officers and others working in the justice system accountable if they break the law. Its motto is, “No one is above the law, especially those sworn to uphold it.”

If you follow the link to his Justice System Integrity Division (http://da.lacounty.gov/jsid.htm), it says this:

When judges, attorneys, police officers, and others working in the justice system break the law, they must be held accountable for their actions...JSID investigates and prosecutes any allegation of criminal misconduct by an attorney practicing civil or criminal law. This applies to crimes directly attributable to his or her fiduciary duties (Example: theft from a client’s trust fund), as well as criminal acts that bear no relationship to his or her role as an attorney (Example: illegal drug possession). JSID responsibilities also include cases of attorneys who practice law while disbarred, suspended or otherwise ineligible to lawfully practice law.

His deputy DA employees need a good ash-kickin or worse for their handling of this case. :mad:

dellgsg5
12-23-2009, 7:48 PM
Great jod CGN Foundation.

Legasat
12-23-2009, 7:59 PM
Well done to Mr. Davis and the CGF!

It still tweaks me that the Gov't can be so wrong, and still create these situations that tie up people's lives for so long, and in most cases cost someone a lot of money!

And on top of that, we have to file and go through another arduous process to get the dang guns back!!!

bodger
12-23-2009, 8:01 PM
Yup, and folks who live down in the LA area should consider complaining to the DA. Here is his web site (http://da.co.la.ca.us/history/cooley.htm):



If you follow the link to his Justice System Integrity Division (http://da.lacounty.gov/jsid.htm), it says this:



His deputy DA employees need a good ash-kickin or worse for their handling of this case. :mad:

Definitely. Misconduct should not be allowed to pass without challenge. Especially with these anti-gun DAs that are looking to crucify anyone with a gun whilst ignoring the defendant's rights.

This guy never should have been arrested, much less charged, and then threatened with a felony trump-up for defending himself?

That DA is the criminal in this scenario. Just like the judge and the DA in Theseus' case.

I'm sending some dough to CGF.

GuyW
12-23-2009, 8:03 PM
And on top of that, we have to file and go through another arduous process to get the dang guns back!!!

...ought to sue the cop and DA in Small Claims Court for unlawful harrassment leading to financial loss....

.

obeygiant
12-23-2009, 8:04 PM
Jason has got some serious moxy! Great Job!

wash
12-23-2009, 8:10 PM
the 19 year-old Cal State University Long Beach college student, and two of his friends were in a Long Beach industrial area late at night performing experiments with legal compressed air devices!

Great job CGF, but we need to tell people, if you are going to experiment with your legal compressed air device late at night in an industrial area adjacent to a major population center, leave your empty gun at home.

I know he didn't do anything illegal except possibly disturbing the peace but CGF had to spend money on this. Maybe this is one of the surprises that Gene has mentioned but I don't see this dismissal changing anything for gun owners beside the individual who was charged.

We need to keep Calgunners out of trouble period.

Yankee Clipper
12-23-2009, 8:15 PM
Up to this point CGN Foundation has done an admirable job in the face of opposition that others would not dare contest but it seems to me we are always in a defensive position. Is there any way that the CGN Foundation can to go on the offensive by charging the arresting deputies and the ADA's with felony abuse of office (or some such)? I'm sorry if this tact sounds too outlandish but I think it's time for a two pronged attack. The law is, after all, on our side.

bambam8d1
12-23-2009, 8:17 PM
Up to this point CGN Foundation has done an admirable job in the face of opposition that others would not dare to contest but it seems to me we are always in a defensive position. Is there any way that the CGN Foundation can to go on the offensive by charging the arresting deputies and the ADA's with felony abuse of office (or some such)? I'm sorry if this tact sounds too outlandish but I think it's time for a two pronged attack. The law is, after all, on our side.

+1 couldnt agree with you more

bodger
12-23-2009, 8:21 PM
Up to this point CGN Foundation has done an admirable job in the face of opposition that others would not dare to contest but it seems to me we are always in a defensive position. Is there any way that the CGN Foundation can to go on the offensive by charging the arresting deputies and the ADA's with felony abuse of office (or some such)? I'm sorry if this tact sounds too outlandish but I think it's time for a two pronged attack. The law is, after all, on our side.


Absolutely, I agree.
Make these anti-gun prosecutors think twice before they persecute someone, and make them learn what the law is, not what they want it to be.

This was ridiculous.

CitaDeL
12-23-2009, 8:23 PM
We need to keep Calgunners out of trouble period.

By virtue of the state we live in, I believe it is impossible for gunowners to be left unmolested by our errant government. What then is the point of leaving your arms in the dark safe places of your home while you are doing something perfectly legal elsewhere?

I congratulate Mr. Davis in the sucess against the DA's in this case, but I believe it is after these occurances we should be ready to attack the arrogant persecutors of liberty through litigation or other legal means.

RANDO
12-23-2009, 8:27 PM
thank you CGF.

wash
12-23-2009, 8:50 PM
Would you like a UOC activist to get arrested for smoking a legal electronic cigarette too close to a Starbucks and a gun charge too?

A guy got shot for smoking a cigarette too close to the Starbucks so it could happen.

The same way you wouldn't want an idiot to screw up UOC by doing something unconventional, I don't want to see an important case lacking the required legal backing because CGF ran out of money defending people who could have avioded trouble by applying a little common sense.

trautert
12-23-2009, 8:55 PM
This case, and Stan's, both made me think the same thing. It really is about time to start carrying some of this fight to the antis who are holding various paid offices. Those are our employees, treating us like we are criminals.

VW*Mike
12-23-2009, 8:55 PM
Good job CGF.

I will play devils advocate though, having grown up in the LBC, its wise not to be poking around industrial places that are dark at night, let alone with any gun in the car. Gangs, street racing, etc can all be found in places like this. Were they breaking the law, no, asking for trouble, yes.

WokMaster1
12-23-2009, 8:57 PM
So Mr Davis will not be getting a X'mas card from the DA's office this year. LOL! Good job!

otteray
12-23-2009, 8:58 PM
Congrats, CGF!
The DA's office is disgusting!
Wasn't a DA somewhere jailed awhile back for a similar attitude against some white students falsely accused of raping a woman?
These ones should be held accountable, as well, IMHO.
But I am just a concerned citizen.

truthseeker
12-23-2009, 9:03 PM
This really pisses me off that the "STATE" is trying to bluff their way into having someone plead guilty to breaking a law which does not exist!

I am sooo thankful that I found this website and I will definitely be donating BIG when I get my tax refund!

chief003
12-23-2009, 9:03 PM
Well done gentlemen. Thank you for your time and efforts on this case.

By the way, did the Deputy DA really state so bluntly that a felony charge would be directly applied if the defendant continued to pursue a defense within the law by challenging the basis of the government's case? If this is so, a letter and conversation with District Attorney Cooley would seem reasonable and appropriate.

Chief

JDoe
12-23-2009, 9:17 PM
First of all a big congratulations and thank you to all involved in this win.

Second, how is it possible to work with a system that is so blatantly abusive of law abiding citizens? To bring charges, where no crime has been committed, against someone who has committed no crime and seize personal property where no law permits such seizure may not be the definition of tyranny but is without a doubt pointed in that direction.

...And in addition, the District Attorney informed Mr. Davis that they would add another count of 12025 for possession of the “compressed air” device if Mr. Davis persisted in attempting to defend this case...

The sad fact of life in America is that the vast majority of criminal cases are plead out by defendants who are poorly represented and without the ability to properly defend themselves let alone understand the process they find themselves in. I can't help but believe that some of these people are completely innocent as are the subjects of this thread. In this case the state not only attempted to deny justice to the young man but but also attempted to strong arm him into pleading out to something he did not do. How can this be legal? How can these LEOs and ADAs and DAs get away with this?

Up to this point CGN Foundation has done an admirable job in the face of opposition that others would not dare contest but it seems to me we are always in a defensive position. Is there any way that the CGN Foundation can to go on the offensive by charging the arresting deputies and the ADA's with felony abuse of office (or some such)? I'm sorry if this tact sounds too outlandish but I think it's time for a two pronged attack. The law is, after all, on our side.

Of course I agree in principle. If there is a good chance of getting some satisfaction for our side, the side of law abiding citizens, and it would have a net positive effect on how we are treated by the justice system maybe it would be a good thing to pursue. But resources are not infinite so I guess we must leave the decision of whether to pursue this further to the Calguns Foundation.

BigDogatPlay
12-23-2009, 9:34 PM
Well done CGF and legal team!!! Christmas has me by the short and curleys money wise, but there is a donation inbound anyway. This is hope and change we all can believe in, to borrow an overused term.

I learned very early in my career to never take whizz poor cases to the DA. Granted I wasn't on scene at the arrest, but I am left to wonder what the deputies were thinking.

JasonDavis
12-23-2009, 10:26 PM
I usually avoid postings of comments or opinions on this site, but here goes...

I will let CGF speak for itself on this, but I believe that this case was important to defend because we cannot continue to have over aggressive District Attorneys expand the laws through misapplication and poor representation by defense attorneys. This kind of crap has to stop. And, the only way it will stop is through vigorous defense at every step where it is right and just as well as a strategic, coordinated, and well planned offense that includes both litigation (that is both likely to succeed and change policy throughout the state) and legislation designed to clarify and simplify the law.

On this specific topic, I have personally talked with a number of prosecutors, district attorneys, and defense attorneys who informed me that they have seen people prosecuted (and done the prosecuting) for possession of unloaded shotguns and rifles in their vehicle and that it's common. Most did not understand my agitation with the situation. This usually leads me into a tirade where I go in to great detail about the lazy prosecutors, law enforcement, and judicial officers who fail to look at the law or read the briefs when they are sworn to uphold the Constitution. (Crickets!)

This cannot continue to go on unabated. But, unfortunately, many of these victims, known as defendants, do not have the money to put forth a decent defense, nor do they have the wherewithal to contact an organization for assistance. The result is a conviction for that individual, then another, and another, and a progressive loss of rights for everyone else.

I would say I was hoping for a loss in my case so as to take the case up on appeal, but I have a duty to defend my client. Had the case been fought all the way through, we could have a great appellate level decision clarifying this for all in the state.

With this case dismissed, however, we are currently looking at all alternatives, including both civil and legislative fixes to clarify the situation - the first of which would not be practical without a dismissal.

wildhawker
12-23-2009, 10:37 PM
I would say I was hoping for a loss in my case so as to take the case up on appeal, but I have a duty to defend my client. Had the case been fought all the way through, we could have a great appellate level decision clarifying this for all in the state.

With this case dismissed, however, we are currently looking at all alternatives, including both civil and legislative fixes to clarify the situation - the first of which would not be practical without a dismissal.

:43: You sure know how to sweet talk a guy, Mr. Davis.

Merry Christmas!

gadjeep
12-23-2009, 10:46 PM
Way to stare the bullies down and not blink. That DA must have looked llike someone had peed in his cheerios. Keep up the great and important work CGN, keep the Festivus miracles coming!

Roadrunner
12-23-2009, 10:51 PM
This is why I like Calguns so much, because you keep reminding me of why I left Urbania. Mind you, I am not anti-law enforcement, but I am anti-authoritarian, and anti-jerk.

neanyoe
12-23-2009, 10:58 PM
Well done CGF!

blackberg
12-23-2009, 11:04 PM
great job guys!

kinda scary, seems it was close to home
-bb

oaklander
12-23-2009, 11:10 PM
This thread is full of WIN!

:D

But the DA is full of FAIL - perhaps he can start his own law office:

http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/epic-fail-law-firm-name-fail.jpg

hoffmang
12-23-2009, 11:37 PM
1. Freedom is not free. Please donate (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/donate). The next time it could be you calling one of us at O-dark-thirty with a LEO or DA who needs an education.

2. In the past, owning a gun exposed you to this kinda mess. Half the point of CGF is to end this. It's much easier for us to afford educating LEA's and DA's than any individual gun owner. When you give to CGF you give to every gun owner in the state.

3. We are on the offensive. We've been slowed by Nordyke going en-banc and all we await is McDonald. After McDonald both the environment will change and we will significantly change the environment. CGF's real purpose in life is to work itself out of a problem to solve. Until then, we're here to keep the folks who have no moral turpitude out of hot water.

-Gene

AndrewMendez
12-23-2009, 11:37 PM
Hell YEAH!! Merry Christmas for that guy!

69Mach1
12-23-2009, 11:43 PM
On a scale from 1 to 10. How much of a Bit** Slap was this for the deputy district attorney?

Congrats.

Beatone
12-23-2009, 11:52 PM
DA's don't like being wrong for any reason. Good work CGF! :thumbsup:

nick
12-24-2009, 12:01 AM
So, is any legal action planned against the DA and police officers in question?

hoffmang
12-24-2009, 12:02 AM
So, is any legal action planned against the DA and police officers in question?

DA's have nearly absolute immunity. There is a case in front of SCOTUS that may change that only when there is clear and convincing evidence that a DA fabricated evidence...

-Gene

Paul E
12-24-2009, 12:03 AM
Congrats to the CGF/Davis and defendant. Great news

Telperion
12-24-2009, 12:09 AM
DA's have nearly absolute immunity. There is a case in front of SCOTUS that may change that only when there is clear and convincing evidence that a DA fabricated evidence...

-Gene
Unfortunately, the mantra of "personal responsibility" applies to everyone except government agents...

nick
12-24-2009, 12:16 AM
DA's have nearly absolute immunity. There is a case in front of SCOTUS that may change that only when there is clear and convincing evidence that a DA fabricated evidence...

-Gene

So basically a DA can charge someone with a non-existing crime and get away with it?

Which case is it? Sounds like good reading :)

Racefiend
12-24-2009, 12:17 AM
It's always awesome to see CGF making a difference

hoffmang
12-24-2009, 12:25 AM
Which case is it? Sounds like good reading :)

Pottawattamie County v. McGhee (http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Pottawattamie_County_v._McGhee).

-Gene

Meplat
12-24-2009, 12:26 AM
Excellent! Let's hope he gets his Mossberg back right quick. They should clean & oil it for him :D

t's probably already in some deputies collection.

nick
12-24-2009, 12:34 AM
Pottawattamie County v. McGhee (http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Pottawattamie_County_v._McGhee).

-Gene

Thanks, that's good reading, although I find the idea of pretty much unconditional immunity so many "public" servants have acquired over the years distasteful. Here's an interesting bit:

The Justices seemed openly reluctant to undermine the rule of absolute prosecutorial immunity for fear of “chilling” prosecutors from performing critical duties. Justice Breyer worried a new pre-trial liability would discourage prosecutors from questioning witnesses. He dismissed as less important Clement’s counter-claim that immunity for all acts that contribute to a trial would give malicious prosecutors an incentive to use ill-gotten evidence in court.

Clearly malicious prosecution isn't as much of a problem. After all, it's usually just the mere mortals who are affected.

cryoguy
12-24-2009, 12:55 AM
Good job CGF... Good looking out. I like reading success stories when it comes to protecting my 2nd amendment rights.... Yay for us gun owners and the like.....

Meplat
12-24-2009, 1:00 AM
So crawel in a hole and pull it closed behind you? Is that the action of a free man?



Great job CGF, but we need to tell people, if you are going to experiment with your legal compressed air device late at night in an industrial area adjacent to a major population center, leave your empty gun at home.

I know he didn't do anything illegal except possibly disturbing the peace but CGF had to spend money on this. Maybe this is one of the surprises that Gene has mentioned but I don't see this dismissal changing anything for gun owners beside the individual who was charged.

We need to keep Calgunners out of trouble period.

Joe
12-24-2009, 1:11 AM
awesome job calguns foundation

hamster
12-24-2009, 1:16 AM
:D
7UU24802LX966****

high_revs
12-24-2009, 1:24 AM
great to see the donations (mine too :) ) get put to good use and put those idiot DAs in their places. man, i wish there was an offensive move to make DAs accountable too for their laziness and idiocy. i'm sure knowing/having consequences wasting tax dollars at work will lower these over agressive DAs hellbent to make a prosecution no matter what the facts are.

ldivinag
12-24-2009, 2:36 AM
donated...

and would someone change JASON DAVIS's member status to something else besides JUNIOR MEMBER...

*** KICKER is a good one... :)

r08ert209cali
12-24-2009, 5:59 AM
:King:
Way to stick it to the A-Holes

GrizzlyGuy
12-24-2009, 7:07 AM
DA's have nearly absolute immunity.

That's true, but as elected officials, they aren't immune from the will of the people. If this has happened once, then other citizens may have been persecuted by his office in matters that have nothing to do with guns. It might then be possible to form a broad-based coalition to oppose his re-election and/or demand reforms.

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." - Benjamin Franklin, July 4th, 1776 (http://www.ushistory.org/valleyforge/history/franklin.html)

pdq_wizzard
12-24-2009, 8:03 AM
I think it is time to have one more law on the books,
If a DA charges you with trumped up charges, they should have to pay for your defense. And not with a PD.

I think I will give Cox a call :thumbsup:

bodger
12-24-2009, 8:11 AM
That's true, but as elected officials, they aren't immune from the will of the people. If this has happened once, then other citizens may have been persecuted by his office in matters that have nothing to do with guns. It might then be possible to form a broad-based coalition to oppose his re-election and/or demand reforms.

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." - Benjamin Franklin, July 4th, 1776 (http://www.ushistory.org/valleyforge/history/franklin.html)


Problem is, so many voters in this state are anti-gun. I'm convinced many of them have the mindset that anyone with a gun is a criminal, so if they get convicted, it's a good thing and it doesn't matter if the letter of the law was followed or not.

Guns=crime and criminals. And these elected officials use that anti-gun sentiment to further their careers. And they get away with it, unless one has a good lawyer like Mr. Davis.

Telperion
12-24-2009, 8:14 AM
I think it is time to have one more law on the books,
If a DA charges you with trumped up charges, they should have to pay for your defense. And not with a PD.

I think I will give Cox a call :thumbsup:
I believe an outcome that results in full vindication - dismissal of all charges or acquittal on all charges - ought to have some automatic costly consequences for the prosecution, but that's not how the law works today. They have the advantage of initiating cases, so they should only try matters where the law and facts are clear.

just4fun63
12-24-2009, 8:19 AM
Up to this point CGN Foundation has done an admirable job in the face of opposition that others would not dare contest but it seems to me we are always in a defensive position. Is there any way that the CGN Foundation can to go on the offensive by charging the arresting deputies and the ADA's with felony abuse of office (or some such)? I'm sorry if this tact sounds too outlandish but I think it's time for a two pronged attack. The law is, after all, on our side.

Wouldn't the threats made by the ADA be considered a "threat under color of authority" I think this is a crime under the cal P.C. and is chargeable.

Maybe one of our legal brains would comment

Oh here's $20.00 for the cause 23L0940695897061X

Legasat
12-24-2009, 8:32 AM
Again, Nice Job! I just donated to CGF!!!

wash
12-24-2009, 8:51 AM
So crewel in a hole and pull it closed behind you? Is that the action of a free man?
It's the action of a smart man and I never said crawl in a hole, I said stay out of trouble. Don't give the police or DA's the ability to infringe your rights.

Some people here have mentioned that they want CGF to go on the offensive, not always defend. We already are actually with the Sykes and Peña cases but those aren't as visible on the forum as something like this.

I hope Mr. Davis is able to effectively use this incident to educate PD's and DA's. As much as they need the education, that's a very good thing but if we can keep Calgunners out of trouble, CGF can attack with more cases like Sykes and Peña that if sucessful will have a much bigger effect on our gun rights.

It's all about strategy and common sense.

Steveo8
12-24-2009, 9:23 AM
I seem to recall that there was either a petition or initiative last year to have the defendants reimbursed if they were not found guilty of the charges. Anyone remember anything about this?

mej16489
12-24-2009, 9:47 AM
Every time the CGF defends a CalGunner an Angel gets its wings!!! errr I mean another donation from me...incoming!

Chatterbox
12-24-2009, 11:02 AM
Donation on the way.

Eckolaker
12-24-2009, 11:42 AM
Knowledge is power.

Denver
12-24-2009, 11:43 AM
What is scary is that this could happen to anyone of us transporting rifles and shotguns to the range. We live in a Brave New World here.

hoffmang
12-24-2009, 12:15 PM
I believe an outcome that results in full vindication - dismissal of all charges or acquittal on all charges - ought to have some automatic costly consequences for the prosecution, but that's not how the law works today.
This would be a bad idea due to unintended consequences. If you make it costly for Prosecutors to drop cases, then a case like this would go to trial even though its wrong on the law to save whatever cost you're imposing on them...

What is scary is that this could happen to anyone of us transporting rifles and shotguns to the range. We live in a Brave New World here.

This is a major part of why CGF exists. These sorts of defenses are expensive for individuals but relatively inexpensive for a group of gunowners working in concert with and through CGF.

-Gene

bodger
12-24-2009, 12:19 PM
Every time the CGF defends a CalGunner an Angel gets its wings!!! errr I mean another donation from me...incoming!


HA! Okay Mr. Bailey, I'm sending one too.

Merry Christmas.

falawful
12-24-2009, 12:35 PM
So:

"On this specific topic, I have personally talked with a number of prosecutors, district attorneys, and defense attorneys who informed me that they have seen people prosecuted (and done the prosecuting) for possession of unloaded shotguns and rifles in their vehicle and that it's common."

The next time you get:

"Are there any weapons in the vehicle?"

The answer is:

"NO!"

Period.

MidnightSon117
12-24-2009, 12:44 PM
YES!!!! In de face!

Cokebottle
12-24-2009, 12:54 PM
I seem to recall that there was either a petition or initiative last year to have the defendants reimbursed if they were not found guilty of the charges. Anyone remember anything about this?
We need this.
Nobody can make bail on their own. Like medical care, we buy insurance, and the availability of insurance cheapens the walk-in costs, so we use it more. Bail bondsmen charge 10%, so the courts impose excessive bail amounts in an effort to reach a point that the defendant cannot make that 10% to post bond.

So a minor crime ends up costing the defendant $5,000-$10,000 out of pocket that can never be recovered.

Tell ya right now, that if I were taken in and bail were set at $10,000 (stepdaughter got $5,000 bail for an FTA on a driving with no insurance), my wife would not be able to come up with the $1,000 to pay the bondsman.
Even when I was working, a bail amount of $50,000 would have flattened us.


If found not guilty, or if the charges are dropped, the DA's office should be forced to pay the bail bondsman's commission.
Either that, or outlaw the bail bond business and reduce standard bail schedules by 90%, and in the event of a guilty verdict, the bail amount is applied toward fines and fees. Defendants would still have the same out of pocket expense.

PIRATE14
12-24-2009, 1:36 PM
Very nice.....

It's tough to stand up against the GOV'T when you know your right.....ask me how I know...;)

KUDOS...to CGF....an JASON

MERRY XMAS...

Liberty1
12-24-2009, 1:38 PM
This is a major part of why CGF exists. These sorts of defenses are expensive for individuals but relatively inexpensive for a group of gunowners working in concert with and through CGF.

-Gene

I would really like to see some kind of legal gun carrier insurance program developed similar to my POA LDF. I pay hundreds a year for that LDF insurance and I would think lawful gun owners paying $500/year? for defense of "non colorful" legal issues like the above case could be done. This could work and help stock our coffers if a threshold of "shareholders", say 1000, were reached before implementation.

And many thanks to CGF and Jason for this X Mas Gift!!!!!!

chuckdc
12-24-2009, 2:10 PM
Wouldn't the threats made by the ADA be considered a "threat under color of authority" I think this is a crime under the cal P.C. and is chargeable.



Not Cal PC, but US Code. 18 USC 241 and 242 (Deprivation of rights under color of law, and conspiracy to commit same)
The DDA here intentionally tried to deprive a citizen of his legal due process (trial and representation) by extortion and threat to file further and more serious charges not substantiated by any evidence he held, in fact based on a non-existent offense. Given that 2 DDAs were involved, it becomes a conspiracy with the communication of the threat (act in furtherance) by the senior one.

Hey, if it was good enough for the LA cops in the Rodney King situation.....

tazmanian devil dog
12-24-2009, 2:56 PM
Excellent Work!!!!

Meplat
12-24-2009, 4:10 PM
It's the action of a smart man and I never said crawl in a hole, I said stay out of trouble. Don't give the police or DA's the ability to infringe your rights.


With over zealous or corrupt police (some not all), and DA's prone to political prosecution and bending the rules to put another win in their résumé, cupeled with the multitude of laws each one of us encounter every day, no one can know them all, or even most. It is nearly impossible to be certain of avoiding trouble without crawling into a hole and pulling it in after you.

I'm just happy CGF is there to assist with cases like this. Those who make the decisions on which cases are worthy are not stupid or wasteful. I have to assume this case had a bigger up side than most. Including the possibility of going on to set important precedent had it not been dismissed.

You admonish folks to not get in trouble, but how does one do that if officials make up the rules as they go along?

Cokebottle
12-24-2009, 4:43 PM
I suspect that the DDA's response to Mr. Davis defending the case was a reaction to the idea of dismissal (which was the legally correct thing to happen) rather than a plea offer.
DA's are too used to plea bargains. I suspect that a non-gun attorney would have simply presented "Look, the call was for shots fired, shots weren't fired and there is no evidence of this, the 12025 charge for a shotgun is shaky at best, let's settle this out of court as misdemeanor disturbing the peace, $1,000 fine and 2 years probation"
Would have still been a conviction feather for the DDA.

k1dude
12-24-2009, 4:55 PM
Wow. Good work and thank you once again. If we keep winning cases I'm gonna go broke donating to CalGuns. Another donation incoming!

stan
12-24-2009, 5:10 PM
another win for CGF and jason davis! wooooooooo! first my case now this.


on the flip side, it sure is sad that we have to have a foundation and lawyers and things just to make sure that our rights are not infringed upon and that we aren't punished for crimes we did not commit......

RP1911
12-24-2009, 5:24 PM
"it sure is sad that we have to have a foundation and lawyers and things just to make sure that our rights are not infringed upon and that we aren't punished for crimes we did not commit..."

sig material

wash
12-24-2009, 5:39 PM
You admonish folks to not get in trouble, but how does one do that if officials make up the rules as they go along?

Pretty simple, if you're fooling around with a legal compressed air device, leave your guns at home.

It's common sense, they were testing it in an industrial area at night because they knew that testing it during the day in a residential area or at school was a bad idea.

Use good judgement is all I'm saying. If you know better or you're going to attract attention, leave your guns at home.

Be aware of your surroundings also, if they were testing it out in the desert with an empty shotgun and ran in to some type of law enforcement, things would have happened much differently.

It's the same reason why I wouldn't UOC an AK pistol while wearing a slingshot swimsuit, I know better than to wear a slingshot swimsuit.

Lone_Gunman
12-24-2009, 5:50 PM
At some point, and I hope it's soon, a CalGuns.net or CalGuns Foundation sticker on a car is going to be a red flag to LEOs that says: "Don't F with this guy in terms of firearms. He's educated on the laws and has the backing of a kick azz legal team. These are not the guns you're looking for." Keep fighting guys. I'll keep donating.

RP1911
12-24-2009, 5:52 PM
I hope so. Look at my avatar.

K5Cruiser
12-24-2009, 5:52 PM
Congrats CGF! This is welcome news to say the least. Thank you!

It's the same reason why I wouldn't UOC an AK pistol while wearing a slingshot swimsuit, I know better than to wear a slingshot swimsuit.
LMAO :rofl:

yellowfin
12-24-2009, 6:21 PM
I sincerely hope Mr. Davis and company are pursuing charges against all the offending police and prosecution for malicious behavior, misconduct, etc. Those guys need to hurt BIG TIME for even trying or discussing trying this.

SimpleCountryActuary
12-24-2009, 8:15 PM
A big Hip, Hip, HOORAY! for CGF.

N6ATF
12-24-2009, 8:30 PM
Not Cal PC, but US Code. 18 USC 241 and 242 (Deprivation of rights under color of law, and conspiracy to commit same)
The DDA here intentionally tried to deprive a citizen of his legal due process (trial and representation) by extortion and threat to file further and more serious charges not substantiated by any evidence he held, in fact based on a non-existent offense. Given that 2 DDAs were involved, it becomes a conspiracy with the communication of the threat (act in furtherance) by the senior one.

Hey, if it was good enough for the LA cops in the Rodney King situation.....

Indeed. Both 241 and 242 are capital crimes. These civil rights-violating traitors should not be breathing the same air as us.

Seesm
12-24-2009, 8:36 PM
CGF for the WIN!!! Merry Christmas!!!

rcantu
12-24-2009, 8:45 PM
i think once the shotgun gets returned, formal complaints should be made on the behavior and attitudes of the DA and also the officer/officers of that department who made the arrest should be 'educated' on the law as well.

eljBRD
12-24-2009, 9:16 PM
You would think that the DAs would be SMART enough to interpret the law to the point...BUT GOOD JOB CGF!!!!

FS00008
12-24-2009, 11:43 PM
Is there any way to go after the DAs (Both of them) for baseless threats? Civil court?

artherd
12-25-2009, 12:42 AM
It disturbs me that the prosecutor threatened the defendant with additional charges for having the audacity to defend himself in court.

It disturbs the fundamentals of professional responsibility that come with Bar card too...

Digital_Boy
12-25-2009, 12:43 AM
I sincerely hope Mr. Davis and company are pursuing charges against all the offending police and prosecution for malicious behavior, misconduct, etc. Those guys need to hurt BIG TIME for even trying or discussing trying this.

Forget charges or fines against LASD. What he can hope for, and probably get, are some big fat black marks and negative reviews that go into the involved deputy's permanent personnel files, which will have a material impact when it comes time for performance reviews and promotions. An extra bonus would be for the deputies involved to get a week or so of mandatory unpaid vacation, aka suspension, but unfortunately this level of civil rights infringement isn't newsworthy enough to warrant that.

artherd
12-25-2009, 12:50 AM
At some point, and I hope it's soon, a CalGuns.net or CalGuns Foundation sticker on a car is going to be a red flag to LEOs that says: "Don't F with this guy in terms of firearms. He's educated on the laws and has the backing of a kick azz legal team. These are not the guns you're looking for." Keep fighting guys. I'll keep donating.

It is my personal goal to bring about a world in which corrupt law enforcement see "The Calguns Foundation" stickers and start shaking with fear.

EDR
12-25-2009, 5:07 AM
You go, guys! Terrible how stubborn our "public servants" can be.

Anothercoilgun
12-25-2009, 7:25 AM
The is great news. But I am sick and tired of hearing it. Tire of the same sequence of events taking place. Why is it that when citizens do follow the law they are still confined, inconvenienced, confiscated, and forced to participate in trials that should not have been in the first place.

Like a lab animal receiving electric shots for reaching for a fruit, its happens over and over and over again. Do they not learn? What is wrong with the district Chiefs, and the Lieutenants. Why are citizens seen as second class citizens? A child in error would be corrected. An non complaint employee would be fired. But when the system itself does wrong what is the recourse?

pieeater
12-25-2009, 8:34 AM
According to the police report, the 19 year-old Cal State University Long Beach college student, and two of his friends were in a Long Beach industrial area late at night performing experiments with legal compressed air devices.

Uh maybe i'm the odd one here. But does this sound like a really stupid Idea to anyone else.

Skullster
12-25-2009, 8:47 AM
What a nice story to read on Christmas morning. Warms the heart to know CALGUNS is looking out for us. Can hardly wait to go shoot my Christmas gift a new XD 40.

redone
12-25-2009, 9:03 AM
Isn't the 2nd prosecutor in violation of any CA law ?

That would be the kind of law we need , against making an unwarranted threat.


How about a Long Gun Freedom day where everyone drives around with long gun in the back window ? Bullet Button Guns and Mossberg 500's.

SteveH
12-25-2009, 9:30 AM
why is "evidence" in quotation marks? Inspite of the problems with the arrest if its a gun charge the gun does need to be collected as evidence. Are we advocating shoddy evidence collection procedures for the police now? Should the court just take the officers word for such things?

SteveH
12-25-2009, 9:31 AM
It disturbs me that the prosecutor threatened the defendant with additional charges for having the audacity to defend himself in court. :mad:

Three cheers for CGF and Mr. Davis! Hooray for the defendant, for calling The Right People for his defense! :thumbsup:

And a big ol' stink-eye to LASD and the DAs for being such jerks! :p

Its common. All part of the give and take that is the plead bargain process.

SteveH
12-25-2009, 9:35 AM
wow...what would have been gained by the DA pursuing this? what a-holes! glad to see common sense from the judge prevailed.

Makes me wonder about what lead up to the contact. "college students conducting an experiment"

Did this "experiment" include tresspassing and vandalism? That would explain the DA's agressiveness.

SteveH
12-25-2009, 9:46 AM
According to the police report, the 19 year-old Cal State University Long Beach college student, and two of his friends were in a Long Beach industrial area late at night performing experiments with legal compressed air devices.

Uh maybe i'm the odd one here. But does this sound like a really stupid Idea to anyone else.

Its sounds like PC speak for tresspasing to me. But I'm admittedly a cynic. What was the nature of the compressed air device? spud gun? Air compressor BB machine gun? Did they have the permission of the property owner to be there? No matter what the answers to those questions are the cops were still wrong on the gun charge though. Did they miss some other charges that would have stuck because they narrowly focused on the firearm aspect?

akspetsnaz
12-25-2009, 10:48 AM
This is a great community.

Donation will be forwarded.

HowardW56
12-25-2009, 10:53 AM
According to the police report, the 19 year-old Cal State University Long Beach college student, and two of his friends were in a Long Beach industrial area late at night performing experiments with legal compressed air devices.

Uh maybe i'm the odd one here. But does this sound like a really stupid Idea to anyone else.

It may have been foolish, but not illegal....

SteveH
12-25-2009, 10:54 AM
I think calling air rifles/BB guns "legal compressed air devices" and saying they were "performing experiments" with them late at night adds a level of BS to the story that detracts from the message. Maybe that language goes over well here, but generally I think it would be met with skepticism and a collective eye roll.

Just sayin'.

Did the "experiments" include testing the ability of said projectile to penetrate construction materials found commonly in industrial park buildings?

Please tell me CGF did not spend money defending common vandals?

hoffmang
12-25-2009, 11:11 AM
Did the "experiments" include testing the ability of said projectile to penetrate construction materials found commonly in industrial park buildings?

Please tell me CGF did not spend money defending common vandals?

There was absolutely no property damaged what so ever. This was a noise call. I tend to agree that they could have found a better place to play with their toy, but they were harming no one and just creating booms away from any residences. If I recall correctly, this was testing for going somewhere to actually try said device.

-Gene

Zachs300zx
12-25-2009, 11:18 AM
Donation sent!
Threats with escalation to felony charges just for trying to defend your case and trying to call a shotgun a concealable handgun...Wow, I sure hope I never need CGF legal services but I'm glad to know you guys are out there protecting our rights every day. Thanks

Ugly Dwarf
12-25-2009, 11:31 AM
Thank you CGF for a great Christmas present.

Another donation sent to help fund your next good deed.

Dwarf

pieeater
12-25-2009, 11:39 AM
It may have been foolish, but not illegal....

OK so if I go out to an industial park at midnite tonite where I probably shouldnt be in the first place, bringing with me an unloaded gun. Make a bunch of booms that sound like gunfire. You guys will bail me out of any trouble I might get again.

I mean im not trying to be a troll. And maybe these guys did nothing illegal. But seriously talk about no freakin common sense at all.

BigBrassMonkey
12-25-2009, 12:20 PM
Great Job CGF !!

Nessal
12-25-2009, 12:25 PM
Just to show you that the DA isn't out there to find JUSTICE. They are out there to pad their own conviction rate. Low lifes.

CSACANNONEER
12-25-2009, 12:27 PM
Great news! I missed this thread and just got it from a CGF email. If you are not on the CGF list and want to hear about things like this, get on their list!

toopercentmlk
12-25-2009, 12:37 PM
Amazing how blindly criminal those law givers can be. I've been meaning to but I'll be donating again shortly. God forbid if I were ever to need any help from the CGF would I need to explain why I haven't donated in x years!

Gunhacker
12-25-2009, 4:00 PM
This happy ending only serves to reinforce that my decision a few months ago to set up a regularily scheduled donation to the Calguns Foundation via Home Banking was one the best decisions that I've made in a long time, and it also proves that the CGF is worthy of every penny it gets for support.

Congrats on the victory!!

Telperion
12-25-2009, 7:04 PM
This would be a bad idea due to unintended consequences. If you make it costly for Prosecutors to drop cases, then a case like this would go to trial even though its wrong on the law to save whatever cost you're imposing on them...

-Gene
Stack the damages so that brinksmanship and bravado carry extreme risk. Drop all the charges before the jury gets the case and the state pays defendant's legal costs. Full acquittal by the jury and it's double damages.

pieeater
12-25-2009, 7:06 PM
OK so if I go out to an industial park at midnite tonite where I probably shouldnt be in the first place, bringing with me an unloaded gun. Make a bunch of booms that sound like gunfire. You guys will bail me out of any trouble I might get again.

I mean im not trying to be a troll. And maybe these guys did nothing illegal. But seriously talk about no freakin common sense at all.

Anyone going to back me up on this I want to exercise my rights!

HowardW56
12-25-2009, 7:10 PM
Anyone going to back me up on this I want to exercise my rights!


I'll park down the block and cheer you on...

hoffmang
12-25-2009, 9:03 PM
Anyone going to back me up on this I want to exercise my rights!

If you're not actually breaking the law, probably yes.

-Gene

artherd
12-25-2009, 10:02 PM
OK so if I go out to an industial park at midnite tonite where I probably shouldnt be in the first place, bringing with me an unloaded gun. Make a bunch of booms that sound like gunfire. You guys will bail me out of any trouble I might get again.

I mean im not trying to be a troll. And maybe these guys did nothing illegal. But seriously talk about no freakin common sense at all.

You know what - yes.

Absent actual color like trespassing, we'll defend the confiscation of legal guns.

cbn620
12-25-2009, 10:39 PM
The first words out of the new Deputy District Attorney’s mouth were, “Do you want your client to be prosecuted with a felony?”

Did anyone else feel like a possum just ran over their grave? These people are low-down dirty crooks. And they have the power to make our lives a living hell. I'm sorry. These statements are absolutely terrifying. This is unabashedly George Orwell esque. How sobering to read these words. This is nothing more than intimidation, and abuse of power.

Last Friday, at the third arraignment date, the Deputy District Attorney took the position that the law is not clear and may well include long guns...

I don't even know what to say to this. The law is perfectly clear. Why do we have legal barrel length and OAL? A shotgun meets the definition of a shotgun and thus a long gun predicated in part on the fact that it has a barrel length of 18+ and OAL of 26+ inches. Are you kidding me? This is not an argument.

What is he implying? 'May well include' my foot. Literally? Because my foot has more in common with a handgun than does an otherwise legal shotgun.

CABilly
12-26-2009, 12:26 AM
I can see it now, commercials calling for closing down the "long gun loophole."

Just picture a conservatively-dressed mid-forties man pulling a tricked-out OLL rifle from the back seat of his car, while children innocently run around a playground behind him:

"I look like an ordinary man, driving an ordinary car. I could be anyone, in any neighborhood. I could also be carrying this in my back seat (pull out OLL AR). Or this (pull out pistol grip shotgun). Or even this (pull out WASR for maximum fright). There's no law to keep me from doing it. There's no law protecting these - or your - children from me having these weapons in my car. Well, we've had enough and are working to close this dangeroud loophole in California law. Join me and parents like you from all over this great state, and vote yes on proposition 768, the People's Firearms Transport Safety Act."

jdberger
12-26-2009, 12:33 AM
OK so if I go out to an industial park at midnite tonite where I probably shouldnt be in the first place, bringing with me an unloaded gun. Make a bunch of booms that sound like gunfire. You guys will bail me out of any trouble I might get again.

I mean im not trying to be a troll. And maybe these guys did nothing illegal. But seriously talk about no freakin common sense at all.

Do you think it's good sense to allow the case law to pile up allowing police seizure of unloaded legally carried guns?

I've a feeling CGF doesn't.

And that's to YOUR benefit, too.

So, yah. They'd defend you. ;)

Scott Connors
12-26-2009, 1:35 AM
[QUOTE=just4fun63;3541103]Wouldn't the threats made by the ADA be considered a "threat under color of authority" I think this is a crime under the cal P.C. and is chargeable.

Maybe one of our legal brains would comment

[snippage]

I don't think that prosecuting them would be possible, but such unethical conduct just cries out for a complaint to the bar association for violation of the standard of conduct.

six10
12-26-2009, 2:50 AM
Great job to Mr. Davis and the Calguns Foundation, but I'm genuinely disturbed that there's 'nothing meaningful to be done' about such heinous and unethical tactics coming from any officer of the court. These people are elected/appointed and sworn to serve us, and when they demonstrate instead an inclination to harass and intimidate us, there must be a meaningful and enduring response available to us; otherwise, we're dead, and just haven't yet noticed.

bakokid
12-26-2009, 6:10 PM
is there anyway any of the people or departments involved to be sued. we must start punishing everyone of these tyrannts at any opportunity that we have(they are doining it to us.) hit them in the pocket book and it might help to change their attitudes towards stepping on our rights. maybe even sue for the time u spent in jail and court and the time your gun was/is gone. then hit everyone involved individually.

good luck

hoffmang
12-26-2009, 8:41 PM
All,

That this is a second time is not a good thing. However, the department has made some promises in regards to training and we'll have more on that as it happens. If it doesn't come to pass, then different redress will be considered.

Also note that OCSD certainly reads this site, and probably even this thread. How else do you think they found the AW Flowchart?

Edited to add - got the threads backwards. LAPD arguably had probable cause to search here. Prosecutors have absolute immunity.

-Gene

yellowfin
12-26-2009, 8:48 PM
It is my personal goal to bring about a world in which corrupt law enforcement see "The Calguns Foundation" stickers and start shaking with fear.That world needs to take its root on the east coast as well.

Mendo223
12-27-2009, 3:49 AM
would this have been a different story if it was an unloaded handgun?


the fact remains that we are still oppressed. makes me want to move to a free state more and more everyday.



Also, does anyone know if the Alameda County Sherrifs Dept is as gestapo like as the LASD?? I happen to live a little too close for comfort to a ACSD department and i see them searching vehicles almost everyday. Granted they are gangbangers but what if im going to the range and i have my evil black rifle in the back? ARGH IM SO SICK OF CALI!!!

hoffmang
12-27-2009, 9:26 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about Alameda County.

-Gene

ilvwhtgrls
12-27-2009, 10:57 AM
great work guys, when I get some extra coin I'll definitely make a donation. Lol, the way I see it, it's a small investment for our freedoms.

cryoguy
12-27-2009, 11:03 AM
Same here. I will be doing a monthly contribution as soon as I can...

eaglemike
12-27-2009, 11:32 AM
All,

That this is a second time is not a good thing. However, the department has made some promises in regards to training and we'll have more on that as it happens. If it doesn't come to pass, then different redress will be considered.

Also note that OCSD certainly reads this site, and probably even this thread. How else do you think they found the AW Flowchart?

Edited to add - got the threads backwards. LAPD arguably had probable cause to search here. Prosecutors have absolute immunity.

-Gene
Gene,
Given the threats for an increased level of prosecution - is there any way to address this? It seems somewhat "unethical" to this freedom loving firearm owner....
TIA
Mike

Mute
12-27-2009, 11:47 AM
I understand that it's unlikely that anyone in this fiasco will be held criminally responsible under our current laws, but what are the likelihood of a successful civil lawsuit, especially against the deputies or DAs, individually, without the benefit of a government funded defense? I for one am really sick of seeing this kind of shoddy police work pass for law enforcement.

A message needs to be sent that there will be consequences for this kind of abuse of power.

JasonDavis
12-27-2009, 12:57 PM
the fact remains that we are still oppressed. makes me want to move to a free state more and more everyday.


Leaving just gives them what they want. Stay and Fight!

wildhawker
12-27-2009, 1:29 PM
Some of us enjoy the battle as much as the spoils... And I'm really looking forward to the spoils.

hoffmang
12-27-2009, 2:10 PM
I understand that it's unlikely that anyone in this fiasco will be held criminally responsible under our current laws, but what are the likelihood of a successful civil lawsuit, especially against the deputies or DAs, individually, without the benefit of a government funded defense? I for one am really sick of seeing this kind of shoddy police work pass for law enforcement.

Total immunity for DA's extends to their personal capacity as well. Plus, the agency they work for will almost always indemnify them.

This is the way the system works - the difference is that more of the law abiding are getting to see it.

-Gene

wash
12-27-2009, 4:16 PM
When we want a law changed we find plaintiffs with standing and sue.

I wonder if we could find enough non-gun plaintiffs that have been screwed over by immune police officers and DA's that we can get those immunity laws changed?

We could do it under cover and our protection will just be an unintended consequence of doing the right thing instead of a reason for a judge to do the wrong thing.

hoffmang
12-27-2009, 4:33 PM
I wonder if we could find enough non-gun plaintiffs that have been screwed over by immune police officers and DA's that we can get those immunity laws changed?


Not likely to happen. There is a SCOTUS case on point this session - Pottawattamie County v. McGhee (http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/how-broad-is-prosecutorial-immunity/).

Keep in mind that most legislators are ex lawyers, judges are ex lawyers, and all prosecutors by definition are lawyers. The tribe protects itself.

-Gene

5968
12-27-2009, 7:15 PM
:clap::cheers2::79:

KylaGWolf
12-27-2009, 9:01 PM
I could be wrong but the ADA could be brought up on charges in front of the bar...maybe could even lose his or her right to practice law. And if it were up to me I would make sure they lost that right in a heartbeat. It is acts like this that makes me think of the comment of practicing law. This lawyer needs to do much more practice before they are ready to actually do law.

Thank you very much to CGF and Jason Davis. Unfortunately I can't afford to help out right now but I am hoping you can get the Mosberg back for the client and the ADA of LA gets just desserts.

KylaGWolf
12-27-2009, 9:27 PM
I usually avoid postings of comments or opinions on this site, but here goes...

I will let CGF speak for itself on this, but I believe that this case was important to defend because we cannot continue to have over aggressive District Attorneys expand the laws through misapplication and poor representation by defense attorneys. This kind of crap has to stop. And, the only way it will stop is through vigorous defense at every step where it is right and just as well as a strategic, coordinated, and well planned offense that includes both litigation (that is both likely to succeed and change policy throughout the state) and legislation designed to clarify and simplify the law.

On this specific topic, I have personally talked with a number of prosecutors, district attorneys, and defense attorneys who informed me that they have seen people prosecuted (and done the prosecuting) for possession of unloaded shotguns and rifles in their vehicle and that it's common. Most did not understand my agitation with the situation. This usually leads me into a tirade where I go in to great detail about the lazy prosecutors, law enforcement, and judicial officers who fail to look at the law or read the briefs when they are sworn to uphold the Constitution. (Crickets!)

This cannot continue to go on unabated. But, unfortunately, many of these victims, known as defendants, do not have the money to put forth a decent defense, nor do they have the wherewithal to contact an organization for assistance. The result is a conviction for that individual, then another, and another, and a progressive loss of rights for everyone else.

I would say I was hoping for a loss in my case so as to take the case up on appeal, but I have a duty to defend my client. Had the case been fought all the way through, we could have a great appellate level decision clarifying this for all in the state.

With this case dismissed, however, we are currently looking at all alternatives, including both civil and legislative fixes to clarify the situation - the first of which would not be practical without a dismissal.

I want to personally thank you for all the hard work your doing for your client and all the others you have helped on this forum and elsewhere.

KylaGWolf
12-27-2009, 9:38 PM
DA's have nearly absolute immunity. There is a case in front of SCOTUS that may change that only when there is clear and convincing evidence that a DA fabricated evidence...

-Gene

This case could be a good test for that one. I mean come on he threatened more charges if he fought this. That in and of itself smacks of dirty legal tactics. Then again after watching the DA's in action down here in San Diego not prosecute an assault case that they should have nothing surprises me anymore.

KylaGWolf
12-27-2009, 10:10 PM
Some of us enjoy the battle as much as the spoils... And I'm really looking forward to the spoils.


I second that one :D

hoffmang
12-27-2009, 10:42 PM
This case could be a good test for that one. I mean come on he threatened more charges if he fought this. That in and of itself smacks of dirty legal tactics.

I hate to be the messenger, but again the answer is no. Prosecutors can generally do and say what they want and that's what the jurisprudence says. The only thing that keeps them from pressing forward on these sorts of things is the threat of losing or being embarrassed in a court. They have immunity because every actually guilty individual would bring suit after suit simply to delay.

-Gene

Doheny
03-17-2010, 10:23 PM
Did this guy ever get his shotgun back? I looked, but couldn't find a post saying so.

PS...makes me feel good about my CGF donation today!

cr250chevy
03-17-2010, 10:31 PM
[QUOTE=Sad state of affairs that we have so many people on the public payroll who threaten first and think second. Perhaps a complaint to the State Bar might be in order as well. Put the accuser in the position of the accused. Perhaps that will inhibit such cavalier conduct in the future.[/QUOTE]

+1, The DA's comments were completely out of line and unethical. I think it would be wise to pursue a follow up on this matter.

SDgarrick
05-07-2010, 11:15 AM
Can somewhat tell me the title of this case. A buddy of mine is being charged with about the same thing. I was hoping to send this info his way, so he can use it in court as some kind of precedent, or however you word it.

any help would be great.

bwiese
05-07-2010, 11:23 AM
Can somewhat tell me the title of this case. A buddy of mine is being charged with about the same thing. I was hoping to send this info his way, so he can use it in court as some kind of precedent, or however you word it.

any help would be great.

I think your friend should be talking to CGF and perhaps CGF can help if it's 'clean'.

Send "Oaklander" a PM.

Lone_Gunman
05-07-2010, 11:43 AM
Or call them at 1-800-556-2109 ASAP.