PDA

View Full Version : CGF: Peterson v. Garcia (was v. LaCabe)


hoffmang
06-13-2011, 5:05 PM
All,

Today was the amicus deadline in Peterson v. Garcia which is a CGF supported attack on Colorado's no issuance to non-residents while not allowing reciprocity laws as applied to Denver. Our own Gray Peterson is the plaintiff. The case has been renamed to substitute the new AG of CO and Sheriff of Denver.

The opening brief (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Appellants-Opening-Brief-2011-06-06.pdf) was filed a few days ago.

SAF, CGF, and a host of pro-gun organizations (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Mtn-for-leave-to-file--SAF-CGF-et-al-2011-06-13.pdf) from the 20 states whose citizens can't carry at all in Denver filed an amicus (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/SAF-CGF-et-al-Amicus-Brief-2011-06-13.pdf) today.

Also, NRA's Civil Rights Defense Fund also filed an amicus (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Peterson-NRA-Amicus-Curiae-2011-06-10.pdf).

For court watchers there is some amusement. Counsel for the Denver Sheriff decided to oppose Amici (which is generally bad form.) The Court asked (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Order-to-Garcia-Respond-to-motion-for-amicus-2011-06-13.pdf) her to give a reason for her opposition... Should be amusing...

I will add to this thread when the opposition briefing is in.

-Gene

Window_Seat
06-13-2011, 5:34 PM
All,

Today was the amicus deadline in Peterson v. Garcia which is a CGF supported attack on Colorado's no issuance to non-residents while not allowing reciprocity laws as applied to Denver. Our own Gray Peterson is the plaintiff. The case has been renamed to substitute the new AG of CO and Sheriff of Denver.

The opening brief (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Appellants-Opening-Brief-2011-06-06.pdf) was filed a few days ago.

SAF, CGF, and a host of pro-gun organizations (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Mtn-for-leave-to-file--SAF-CGF-et-al-2011-06-13.pdf) from the 20 states whose citizens can't carry at all in Denver filed an amicus (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/SAF-CGF-et-al-Amicus-Brief-2011-06-13.pdf) today.

Also, NRA's Civil Rights Defense Fund also filed an amicus (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Peterson-NRA-Amicus-Curiae-2011-06-10.pdf).

For court watchers there is some amusement. Counsel for the Denver Sheriff decided to oppose Amici (which is generally bad form.) The Court asked (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Order-to-Garcia-Respond-to-motion-for-amicus-2011-06-13.pdf) her to give a reason for her opposition... Should be amusing...

I will add to this thread when the opposition briefing is in.

-Gene

Therefore, within seven calendar days of the date of this order, appellee
LaCabe, through counsel, shall file a response to the NRA’s motion for leave to
appear as amicus curiae, stating whether or not he consents to the filing of the
NRA’s amicus brief. If he does not consent, he shall advise this court of the basis
for his opposition.

Any reason as to why they would do this? Desperation mode?

:popcorn:

Erik.

Dreaded Claymore
06-13-2011, 5:35 PM
Those briefs are a good read, although very familiar. The steamroller is starting up.

bigcalidave
06-13-2011, 5:35 PM
Deny Amici? Is that like requesting that the judge not read the briefs at all?

curtisfong
06-13-2011, 6:03 PM
"Your honor, I object! Judge Stevens: And why is that, Mr. Reede? Fletcher: It's devastating to my case!"

Liberty1
06-13-2011, 6:32 PM
Am I incorrect in reading that the NRA's brief is arguing for striking down Denver's open carry ban ordinance as an alternative to Peterson's claim requiring issuance of a state concealed license?

Funtimes
06-13-2011, 6:36 PM
Big thanks to all involved. Glad everyone was able to come together to show just how "small" a portion of people are affected by these stupid rulings. Even though it was a small contribution, I was happy to be able to support Gray!

luckystrike
06-13-2011, 6:38 PM
quite generous of CGF, I dont remember any other state trying to help us out like that....when focus is needed here.

pointedstick
06-13-2011, 6:54 PM
"Your honor, I object! Judge Stevens: And why is that, Mr. Reede? Fletcher: It's devastating to my case!"

:rofl2:

You can really smell the desperation. They've been so used to winning with shenanigans that they don't really know how to handle a well-coordinated legal assault.

BigDogatPlay
06-13-2011, 8:21 PM
"Your honor, I object! Judge Stevens: And why is that, Mr. Reede? Fletcher: It's devastating to my case!"

"I strenuously object?" Is that how it works? Hm? "Objection." "Overruled." "Oh, no, no, no. No, I STRENUOUSLY object." "Oh. Well, if you strenuously object then I should take some time to reconsider."

Hah.....

corrupt
06-13-2011, 8:37 PM
"This is an emergency request to deny amici!"

"Well I don't hear any sirens, counsel..."

"WOooooOWooooWOOOwoooo!"

Gray Peterson
06-13-2011, 9:17 PM
Am I incorrect in reading that the NRA's brief is arguing for striking down Denver's open carry ban ordinance as an alternative to Peterson's claim requiring issuance of a state concealed license?

It is asking for that, yes, but it's for a point of accentuation.

Window_Seat
06-13-2011, 9:26 PM
"This is an emergency request to deny amici!"

"Well I don't hear any sirens, counsel..."

"WOooooOWooooWOOOwoooo!"

I can't stop LOLing.

That was good, just good... Worthy of a sig line...

:laugh::rofl2::rofl::clap:

Erik.

Southwest Chuck
06-13-2011, 9:52 PM
"Amici were given consent to file by Appellants, Appellee Davis and Intervenor Suthers, but consent was refused by Linda Davison, attorney for Appellee Garcia."

Is she the out of state contingent and/or does she work for LCAV, too ? :p This aught to be some good reading to come. What a tool.

So which is it though, LaCabe or Davis? Which is the one who is objecting? The first Amici says one, the order from the court says the other ??? :confused:

Gray Peterson
06-13-2011, 10:09 PM
Is she the out of state contingent and/or does she work for LCAV, too ? :p This aught to be some good reading to come. What a tool.

So which is it though, LaCabe or Davis? Which is the one who is objecting? The first Amici says one, the order from the court says the other ??? :confused:

She works for the City/County of Denver, and she's objecting on behalf of LaCabe/Garcia.

dantodd
06-13-2011, 11:28 PM
And why do you object to the Amicus Brief?
[ ] They're really good and I don't want to look bad in comparison
[ ] They're the N-R-A!!! That means they're evil
[ ] Oooops, I need a new pair of pants
[ ] It's for the Children

Liberty1
06-14-2011, 4:54 AM
It is asking for that, yes, but it's for a point of accentuation.

Have they (Denver) tried the 'Home Rule' and 'don't mention the Constitution' arguments yet? http://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-113652.html

Gray Peterson
06-14-2011, 6:05 AM
Have they (Denver) tried the 'Home Rule' and 'don't mention the Constitution' arguments yet? http://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-113652.html

State Constitutional home rule doesn't apply to the federal judiciary.

madmike
06-14-2011, 2:23 PM
quite generous of CGF, I dont remember any other state trying to help us out like that....when focus is needed here.

I don't think CGF's motivation is entirely selfless. The effects of a win in this case would be far reaching. Also, if I remember correctly donations were solicited to specifically help with this case, so it may be that regular CGF funds are not being used for this. I may be wrong.

Gray Peterson
06-14-2011, 2:48 PM
quite generous of CGF, I dont remember any other state trying to help us out like that....when focus is needed here.

You would be incorrect here. This isn't about helping Colorado.

During the district court stage, when the state didn't get directly involved, the city was not substantively defending the statute.

When the state got involved, it became more about the right to bear arms (right to carry) itself.

The reason the case was supported was three-fold:

1) The currently existing carry license holders as well as other persons who cannot carry in California, but want to carry in other states, and see Denver and Colorado as a step. No carry permit a Californian can acquire can allow them to carry on their person on foot outside of vehicle if they are traveling on I-70 and they happen to stop in Denver city...

2) A positive 10th Circuit ruling on carry and potential appeal to SCOTUS answering the question of non-resident licenses along with carry, along with scrutiny questions being answered for us, will give many different things for every gun owner in anti-gun jurisdictions like CA, NY, etc....

3) Two words: "Circuit Split". Remember, "chess (or go), not checkers". 10th Circuit is a rocket docket in comparison to the 9th Circuit....

hvengel
06-14-2011, 3:03 PM
The NRA brief uses the term risible in several places when talking about the other sides arguments. I didn't know what this was so I looked it up and found this:

risible [ˈrɪzɪbəl]
adj
1. having a tendency to laugh
2. causing laughter; ridiculous
[from Late Latin rīsibilis, from Latin rīdēre to laugh]

Perhaps the counsel for the Denver Sheriff doesn't like being laughed at?

luckystrike
06-14-2011, 3:23 PM
roger that, sorry I wasnt thinking it through all the way

You would be incorrect here. This isn't about helping Colorado.

During the district court stage, when the state didn't get directly involved, the city was not substantively defending the statute.

When the state got involved, it became more about the right to bear arms (right to carry) itself.

The reason the case was supported was three-fold:

1) The currently existing carry license holders as well as other persons who cannot carry in California, but want to carry in other states, and see Denver and Colorado as a step. No carry permit a Californian can acquire can allow them to carry on their person on foot outside of vehicle if they are traveling on I-70 and they happen to stop in Denver city...

2) A positive 10th Circuit ruling on carry and potential appeal to SCOTUS answering the question of non-resident licenses along with carry, along with scrutiny questions being answered for us, will give many different things for every gun owner in anti-gun jurisdictions like CA, NY, etc....

3) Two words: "Circuit Split". Remember, "chess (or go), not checkers". 10th Circuit is a rocket docket in comparison to the 9th Circuit....

hoffmang
06-14-2011, 9:25 PM
roger that, sorry I wasnt thinking it through all the way

Also note that California will not issue 12050 permits to anyone who is not a resident of California so there is no way for visitors to California to carry.

Win in CA-10, come back to CA-9 with persuasive (but not binding) precedent. Dare CA-9 to split with CA-10 :43:

Note that requiring residents of California to apply to their county of residence is probably legal. Requiring visitors like Gray to not be able to apply at all is unconstitutional, but this way we're fighting that issue in friendlier territory.

Plus, I'd like we Californians to be able to carry in Denver.

Liberty1: NRA CDF is arguing that Denver's open carry ban is clearly unconstitutional if permits aren't issued, yes.

-Gene

corrupt
06-14-2011, 10:43 PM
I didn't even raise an eyebrow when I learned of CGF in Colorado. Unconventional litigatory strategery! STRATEGICATORY FANTASTICAL!

Liberty1
06-14-2011, 11:29 PM
Liberty1: NRA CDF is arguing that Denver's open carry ban is clearly unconstitutional if permits aren't issued, yes.

-Gene

As much as SI CCW will assist more Califorians in daily practical self defense carry then OC, I do wish for a coast to coast OC Right. I'll settle for an anual long arm parade down Pennsylvania Ave. (for now) :)

Added: Could striking the OC ban be the relief granted even if Gray is asking for a license or is NRA just pointing out future potential 'fallout'?

hoffmang
06-15-2011, 12:05 AM
As much as SI CCW will assist more Califorians in daily practical self defense carry then OC, I do wish for a coast to coast OC Right. I'll settle for an anual long arm parade down Pennsylvania Ave. (for now) :)

Added: Could striking the OC ban be the relief granted even if Gray is asking for a license or is NRA just pointing out future potential 'fallout'?

The court has adequate jurisdiction over Denver County... However I doubt that as an outcome because the non-resident restrictions violate even non 2A precedent.

-Gene

krucam
07-15-2011, 3:58 PM
Today, 2 filings in the Peterson case...

07/15/2011 Open Document [9884926] Deficiency notice issued. Type of deficiency: Appellee Lacabe has not filed a brief. Appellee/Respondent brief now due 07/25/2011 for Alvin Lacabe.
:p

07/15/2011 Open Document [9885014] Supplemental authority filed by NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund. Served on 07/15/2011. Manner of Service: ECF/NDA. MB

The NRA Supplemental filing is of course, that of Ezell. Nice of the two big boys to cooperate and "play nice"...well, one of the two...

Regardless, who cares, right?

NRA Brief is attached.

yellowfin
07-15-2011, 4:05 PM
Deficiency notice issued...so Garcia and counsel have to wear dunce caps now?

choprzrul
07-15-2011, 4:29 PM
Deficiency notice issued...so Garcia and counsel have to wear dunce caps now?

I would like to see the judge make them stay after school for detention for being late....

.

Connor P Price
07-15-2011, 5:14 PM
The deficiency notice is for LaCabe, isn't LaCabe out? I thought its just Garcia now, although I haven't slept in nearly 38 hours, maybe im getting delirious and should check back later.

Gray Peterson
07-15-2011, 5:22 PM
The deficiency notice is for LaCabe, isn't LaCabe out? I thought its just Garcia now, although I haven't slept in nearly 38 hours, maybe im getting delirious and should check back later.

LaCabe is a standin for whoever is Manager of Safety. There is a strong possibility there will be one more Manager of Safety if my reading of the local politics is correct.

gunsmith
07-15-2011, 5:24 PM
All,
For court watchers there is some amusement. Counsel for the Denver Sheriff decided to oppose Amici (which is generally bad form.) The Court asked (http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/peterson/Order-to-Garcia-Respond-to-motion-for-amicus-2011-06-13.pdf) her to give a reason for her opposition... Should be amusing..
-Gene


Their reason always seems to be the old "guns are bad" argument, hopefully Judges will start penalizing them for insulting the Court with a weak argument like that.

Connor P Price
07-15-2011, 8:05 PM
LaCabe is a standin for whoever is Manager of Safety. There is a strong possibility there will be one more Manager of Safety if my reading of the local politics is correct.

Thanks for the clarification Gray. I'm really looking forward to seeing this one play out.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

Window_Seat
07-15-2011, 8:25 PM
I guess they get another chance to show up to class, and then if the kid doesn't, s/he the has to sit in "the thinking chair" (that's what they called it when we were in school in SF)... Yeah?

We'll tell him to go eat a sandwich and take a nap, and then he has to sit in the thinking chair...:)

Erik.

hoffmang
07-15-2011, 9:07 PM
Nice of the two big boys to cooperate and "play nice"...well, one of the two...

Regardless, who cares, right?

NRA-CDF isn't the same as NRA-ILA. NRA-ILA has been where the friction comes from.

-Gene