PDA

View Full Version : Recent court ruling on the use of "good cause" as a standard


ddestruel
03-15-2010, 7:08 PM
If "good cause" is too vague for a housing code why is it acceptable for ccw's. When i lived in montana our daytime safe and prudent law was also ruled too vague to be used as a legal standard. Is there something to this in CA court case challenges that I am missing orhas the "good cause" clause just never been properly challenged until Sykes? :confused:



"The city is in clear violation" of the state housing law, the judge said.

He said the City Council took a small step in December to expand housing by approving the rezoning of unused land in the Hacienda Business Park, near the Dublin-Pleasanton BART station. But the ordinance allows city officials to reject construction plans for "good cause," a vague standard that could discourage development, Roesch said.



http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/15/BABR1CG685.DTL

Aleksandr Mravinsky
03-15-2010, 8:21 PM
Well, if 'good cause' was deemed too vague for housing code, then it seems like it could help us win Sykes, too. Not too sure, though, because 'good cause' in housing and 'good cause' for getting a CCW are two different things.

unusedusername
03-15-2010, 9:03 PM
I don't think they are that different. They are both used as a requirement from a state government issued permit.

Glock22Fan
03-15-2010, 9:14 PM
Well, Good Cause has been debated, and validated, in numerous California courts from Salute v. Pitchess and Guillory v. Gates to today. The courts have all ruled that the Sheriff has the (pretty well sole) discretion to determine Good Cause. About the only limitations imposed have been that the Sheriff cannot determine that nobody has Good Cause, and that the sheriff cannot have a class (such as judges) and determine that only that class has Good Cause. The only other limitation has been implementation of the 14th. It doesn't matter what your Good Cause is if the sheriff has never issued to someone for a virtually identical Good Cause, but if they have, you stand a possible chance. Of course, the Horned One is in the details. We have whole jurisdictions where there is only 1 outstanding CCW, where there has supposedly never been a denial and the only (and successful) permit applicant is the City Manager, or someone of like status. Now, tell me that complies with the spirit of the law and equality.

Hopefully, current law cases will one day stand all of this on its head, but for now it is a long way from a slam dunk (whatever that is as I'm not a sport fan)

Roadrunner
03-15-2010, 9:16 PM
I'm thinking McDonald may derail this. But that's just a guess.

Glock22Fan
03-15-2010, 9:41 PM
I'm thinking McDonald may derail this. But that's just a guess.

I'm hoping that you are right, but I think we have enough in the pipeline at present for us to see what is going to happen. Not a lot of point, IMHO, in anyone thinking they have an unbeatable case until the big guns have duked it out for us.

In a micro level though, there is still some mileage in challenging individual departments provided there is enough evidence of wrong doing. We, TBJ, have been, and are doing, just that. We are nearing the end of a forensic examination of one department that has taken nearly two years so far. We believe that even the Feds will have to take notice of the wrongdoing that has been uncovered there.

I was making the general point that the time is not yet ripe for John Doe to say "Good Cause is irrelevant, I think I'll just slam my application in to Los Angeles County and they'll just have to issue me one for 'self-protection.'"

Roadrunner
03-15-2010, 9:43 PM
I heard Ed Worley talking on NRA News tonight about a bill that they are trying to get passed that defines good cause. I think that's a good start to shall issue.

yellowfin
03-15-2010, 10:04 PM
Well, Good Cause has been debated, and validated, in numerous California courts from Salute v. Pitchess and Guillory v. Gates to today. The courts have all ruled that the Sheriff has the (pretty well sole) discretion to determine Good Cause. All of said rulings, of course, being pre-McDonald and IIRC all pre-Heller too, so they're on very, very thin ice.

dantodd
03-15-2010, 10:07 PM
All of said rulings, of course, being pre-McDonald and IIRC all of them being pre-Heller too.

I don't think that John was defending "good cause" or saying that it would withstand scrutiny post-incorporation. I read his post to merely state that "good cause" discretion has been fully litigated wrt CCWs in CA and an attack on the "too vague" aspect in CA courts would be fruitless.

I agree, even more so when we look at Sykes which has a good chance of defeating "good cause" in the Federal Courts.

yellowfin
03-15-2010, 10:16 PM
Oh I know he wasn't defending it, and I know he doesn't like it any more than we do, he was just stating things as they are at this very exact moment. I was just pointing out that exactly how things may be right now is likely quite temporary and all built upon conditions which no longer apply.

bulgron
03-15-2010, 10:42 PM
We are nearing the end of a forensic examination of one department that has taken nearly two years so far. We believe that even the Feds will have to take notice of the wrongdoing that has been uncovered there.


I continue to look forward to this.

Glock22Fan
03-16-2010, 8:36 AM
Oh I know he wasn't defending it, and I know he doesn't like it any more than we do, he was just stating things as they are at this very exact moment. I was just pointing out that exactly how things may be right now is likely quite temporary and all built upon conditions which no longer apply may not apply much longer.

Exactly. With that one slight change.