PDA

View Full Version : Fisher v Kealoha wins on preliminary injunction


wolfwood
07-12-2012, 1:31 PM
I'm glad that Hawaii racked up a win. This is the same judged in the Baker case so hopefully this bodes well.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-hid-1_11-cv-00589/pdf/USCOURTS-hid-1_11-cv-00589-1.pdf

fd15k
07-12-2012, 1:45 PM
No "bear" outside the home still ?

wash
07-12-2012, 2:05 PM
Wow, pretty nice decision but it shows us what we lost in Peruta.

wolfwood
07-12-2012, 2:34 PM
No "bear" outside the home still ?

the case had nothing to do with bear outside the home

mrrsquared79
07-12-2012, 2:46 PM
Can we get a 'Cliff Notes' version for those who aren't lawyers?

wolfwood
07-12-2012, 3:11 PM
Basically the case is about a guy that was convicted of misdemeanor harassment a long time ago. There is currently no evidence that he actually attacked his wife and in fact is still married to her. As far as anyone can tell this may have been just a heated shouting match. So they went ahead and took his guns and then gave them back to him 13 years ago after he finished his probation. Anyway in 09 he goes and gets a permit to get more guns. Not only is it denied he is told that he has to get rid of his guns.
He promptly transfers them to his wife because his original crime is considered domestic violence.

Court ruled that since their is no actual evidence that he engaged in domestic violence since harassment is a lot of things and violence is only one possibility. HPD had to give back his guns. Basically a slight touching is not enough to be a crime of violence you need to actually have engaged in a truly violent act.

anthonyca
07-12-2012, 7:20 PM
Basically the case is about a guy that was convicted of misdemeanor harassment a long time ago. There is currently no evidence that he actually attacked his wife and in fact is still married to her. As far as anyone can tell this may have been just a heated shouting match. So they went ahead and took his guns and then gave them back to him 13 years ago after he finished his probation. Anyway in 09 he goes and gets a permit to get more guns. Not only is it denied he is told that he has to get rid of his guns.
He promptly transfers them to his wife because his original crime is considered domestic violence.

Court ruled that since their is no actual evidence that he engaged in domestic violence since harassment is a lot of things and violence is only one possibility. HPD had to give back his guns. Basically a slight touching is not enough to be a crime of violence you need to actually have engaged in a truly violent act.

Sorry I should read the decision before posting here but I am being lazy.

What about the Feds claiming that any touching is DV? Also in california there is 242 and 243e misdemeanor battery. California courts and jury instruction specifically state that ANY touching, weather it be meant to cause injury or intimidation or not, even if it does not cause pain or harm, is battery. The Feds then take that and say you are banned for life.

fd15k
07-12-2012, 8:02 PM
the case had nothing to do with bear outside the home

Sure, but the way other cases are recited makes an emphasis on "in the home"... or ?

wolfwood
07-13-2012, 12:44 AM
Sorry I should read the decision before posting here but I am being lazy.

What about the Feds claiming that any touching is DV? Also in california there is 242 and 243e misdemeanor battery. California courts and jury instruction specifically state that ANY touching, weather it be meant to cause injury or intimidation or not, even if it does not cause pain or harm, is battery. The Feds then take that and say you are banned for life.

well here is the part from the decision that answers the question

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held
that the phrase “physical force” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
921(a)(33)(A)(i) means “the violent use of force against the body
of another individual.” See United States v. Belless, 338 F.3d
1063, 1068 (9th Cir. 2003).18/ The court reasoned that the
physical force requirement could not possibly include “any
touching” in the “sense of Newtonian mechanics” and held that the
“use of physical force” and “attempted use of physical force” are
not elements of Harassment under H.R.S. 711-1106, asserting that
“[t]o constitute an element of a crime, the particular factor in
question needs to be a constituent part of the offense that must
be proved in every case to sustain a conviction under a given
statute.”

yellowfin
07-13-2012, 9:30 AM
No "bear" outside the home still ?That's the other one, Baker.

wolfwood
07-13-2012, 9:37 AM
That's the other one, Baker.

ya I am really curious what the states response will be to the Ninth circuit opening brief in Baker
that's due on the 24th

wolfwood
07-13-2012, 11:57 AM
btw why is this case not in the big list of cases

you know this one

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Litigation_Past_and_Present

Glock22Fan
07-13-2012, 2:27 PM
Wow, pretty nice decision but it shows us what we lost in Peruta.

You really do have it in for Peruta, don't you? Darned nearly every post you make gets in a snide remark like this.

You aren't the only one who knows the history, you know.

wash
07-13-2012, 2:47 PM
Well you know what they say:

Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

I will never forget.

Flopper
07-13-2012, 4:41 PM
You really do have it in for Peruta, don't you? Darned nearly every post you make gets in a snide remark like this.

You aren't the only one who knows the history, you know.

Wash's comment is far from snide, but he could be downright churlish towards Peruta and it would be totally appropriate.

Glock22Fan
07-13-2012, 5:48 PM
Wash's comment is far from snide, but he could be downright churlish towards Peruta and it would be totally appropriate.

Appropriate or not, I'm tired of hearing it.

wash
07-13-2012, 6:35 PM
Too bad.

wolfwood
07-13-2012, 8:50 PM
I don't know the history in Peruta so can you fill me in?

wash
07-13-2012, 9:12 PM
Do a search, but long story short Ed Peruta set back California license to carry jurisprudence by about two years.

wolfwood
07-13-2012, 10:08 PM
I'm not that familiar with this website how do you search?

Librarian
07-13-2012, 11:39 PM
I'm not that familiar with this website how do you search?

Start here: http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Peruta_v._County_of_San_Diego