Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-23-2013, 11:44 AM
bryanv790 bryanv790 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default DV Restraining Order 101

I was served with a DV TRO late last year. The TRO was full of lies. Basically the TRO said this and that - nothing but crap. No proof whatsoever. The San Mateo County Judge signed and approved the TRO based on the complaint. It was served to me by 2 Deputies, they took 4 long guns, 2 hand guns, all my magazines and about 3000 rounds of ammo.

Well I went to the hearing with proof I never did what the complaint said. The judge dismissed the case in my favor. I called the same Deputy, and told him the case was dismissed and what do I do to get my guns back? One of was an AR-15 btw. He told me to go to the DOJ CA website, print a form and send it to back to the DOJ of CA for review. A month went by, they sent my a bonded letter saying I have the legal right to own the firearms. I called the Deputy, made an appt with the Property and Picked up my guns. I had to go back a second time to get all my ammo.

Just shows you how easy it is to lose your guns and the process if getting them back.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-23-2013, 11:51 AM
CA-Libertarian CA-Libertarian is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: AZ
Posts: 593
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Good you got them back! Pick-em better next time to avoid this!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-23-2013, 11:56 AM
TRICKSTER's Avatar
TRICKSTER TRICKSTER is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 10,757
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

I wonder if anyone has ever tried to get reimbursement for the DOJ processing fees after having the TRO thrown out?
__________________


Ignorance can be educated.
Crazy can be medicated.
But there is no cure for stupid.


Police Brutality? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRd5oucG114

NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-23-2013, 12:10 PM
alfred1222's Avatar
alfred1222 alfred1222 is offline
NOT BANNED..yet
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Auburn, Alabama
Posts: 7,020
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

My dad got a TRO maybe 4 years back, but wasnt served. He only found out about it when he tried to buy a rifle and got denied. I'm glad you got it all back OP
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
This guy is a complete and total idiot.
/thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
Biden is only there so nobody assassinates Obama. He's like a bullet proof vest that drinks too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by five.five-six View Post
It's right next to the part that says gays can get married and sluts get free birth control.
ΦΑ
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-23-2013, 12:26 PM
CBruce's Avatar
CBruce CBruce is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,994
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryanv790 View Post
I was served with a DV TRO late last year. The TRO was full of lies. Basically the TRO said this and that - nothing but crap. No proof whatsoever. The San Mateo County Judge signed and approved the TRO based on the complaint. It was served to me by 2 Deputies, they took 4 long guns, 2 hand guns, all my magazines and about 3000 rounds of ammo.

Well I went to the hearing with proof I never did what the complaint said. The judge dismissed the case in my favor. I called the same Deputy, and told him the case was dismissed and what do I do to get my guns back? One of was an AR-15 btw. He told me to go to the DOJ CA website, print a form and send it to back to the DOJ of CA for review. A month went by, they sent my a bonded letter saying I have the legal right to own the firearms. I called the Deputy, made an appt with the Property and Picked up my guns. I had to go back a second time to get all my ammo.

Just shows you how easy it is to lose your guns and the process if getting them back.
Restraining order alone shouldn't be sufficient to have your firearms confiscated. Infringment on your rights should only happen through a jury trial.

Glad to hear it ultimately worked out for you in the end, but whoever issued the false statement should be prosecuted.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-23-2013, 12:30 PM
bodger's Avatar
bodger bodger is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 5,858
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Glad you got your firearms back. I had a TRO put on me in the early 1980's. Complete bulls**t. I slammed a door when I left after an argument, and my girlfriend got the TRO. I never touched her or even raised my voice. In those days, they didn't confiscate guns for a TRO.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-23-2013, 12:43 PM
RandyD's Avatar
RandyD RandyD is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: La Jolla, California
Posts: 4,669
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBruce View Post
Restraining order alone shouldn't be sufficient to have your firearms confiscated. Infringment on your rights should only happen through a jury trial.
As an attorney, I agree with your statement above. However,

Attorney General's Opinions:
A law enforcement officer may seize a firearm from a person on the basis that the person is the subject of an "emergency protective order" if the order includes an existing restraining order as specified in Family Code section 6218. 84 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 117.

6389 (c)(1) Upon issuance of a protective order, as defined in Section 6218, the court shall order the respondent to relinquish any firearm in the respondent's immediate possession or control or subject to the respondent's immediate possession or control.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-23-2013, 2:22 PM
4DSJW 4DSJW is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Northern CA
Posts: 416
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyD View Post
As an attorney, I agree with your statement above. However,

Attorney General's Opinions:
A law enforcement officer may seize a firearm from a person on the basis that the person is the subject of an "emergency protective order" if the order includes an existing restraining order as specified in Family Code section 6218. 84 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 117.

6389 (c)(1) Upon issuance of a protective order, as defined in Section 6218, the court shall order the respondent to relinquish any firearm in the respondent's immediate possession or control or subject to the respondent's immediate possession or control.
RandyD, what about the confiscation of the ammo and magazines. Is confiscation of these, and similar, items also spelled out or is it discretionary. Is there any way to keep everything but the firearms under this kind of situation? Thank you for your comments.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-23-2013, 4:12 PM
bryanv790 bryanv790 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA-Libertarian View Post
Good you got them back! Pick-em better next time to avoid this!
Only if it were that easy. My own mother put this on me, or tried at least.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-23-2013, 4:16 PM
bryanv790 bryanv790 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBruce View Post
Restraining order alone shouldn't be sufficient to have your firearms confiscated. Infringment on your rights should only happen through a jury trial.

Glad to hear it ultimately worked out for you in the end, but whoever issued the false statement should be prosecuted.
I was blown away when they came to my house. Like a SWAT team too, everything short of Ballistic Helmet and Assault Rifle.

But I googled the deputy's name and found out he was using "Obama Money" to fund the police to enforce the seizure of firearms. google john kovach and you will read about the funding he received to enforce the seizure of firearms for DV TRO's.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-23-2013, 4:18 PM
bryanv790 bryanv790 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRICKSTER View Post
I wonder if anyone has ever tried to get reimbursement for the DOJ processing fees after having the TRO thrown out?
I asked the same thing to the DOJ-CA, they almost laughed and said good luck with that.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-23-2013, 4:30 PM
SilverTauron SilverTauron is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,705
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBruce View Post
Restraining order alone shouldn't be sufficient to have your firearms confiscated. Infringment on your rights should only happen through a jury trial.

Glad to hear it ultimately worked out for you in the end, but whoever issued the false statement should be prosecuted.
While I'm no attorney,its my understanding that the Federal Lautenberg Act mandates that anyone subject to a DV restraining order surrender their weapons .That's not just CA,but a nationwide regulation.Doesn't matter if the restraining order is temporary or not,you're disarmed of all firearms and ammo until its lifted.

I came across it in my military days,since "Getting Lautenberged" meant the end of your career.You can't touch a gun or ammo if you're under a DV RO even if you're active military or law enforcement- a fact many clever & mendacious military wives know all to well.
__________________
The more prohibitions you have, the less virtuous people will be.
The more subsidies you have, the less self reliant people will be.
-Lao-Tzu, Tau Te Ching. 479 BCE

The 1911 may have been in wars for 100 years, but Masetro Bartolomeo Beretta was arming the world 400 years before John Browning was ever a wet dream.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-23-2013, 5:29 PM
RandyD's Avatar
RandyD RandyD is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: La Jolla, California
Posts: 4,669
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

In the restraining order documents, it specifically lists that a restrained person cannot own ammunition. Owning magazines, is not listed as a prohibited item.

As far as recovering the costs, once the OP incurs all of his costs, he can file a motion and seek a court order that the other party, pay all of his costs. I do not have any statutory authority to do this but such relief is equitable, and family law courts are courts of equity.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-23-2013, 5:41 PM
sirgrumps's Avatar
sirgrumps sirgrumps is offline
1911 & AR-15 fan
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,178
iTrader: 77 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryanv790 View Post
Well I went to the hearing with proof I never did what the complaint said. The judge dismissed the case in my favor. I called the same Deputy, and told him the case was dismissed and what do I do to get my guns back? One of was an AR-15 btw. He told me to go to the DOJ CA website, print a form and send it to back to the DOJ of CA for review. A month went by, they sent my a bonded letter saying I have the legal right to own the firearms. I called the Deputy, made an appt with the Property and Picked up my guns. I had to go back a second time to get all my ammo.
What burns my hide is you had to wait ONE MONTH and pay a fee(tax) for the DOJ to "clear" you of something you never did. You can't just take the court papers dismissing the order to the Sheriffs' and get your stuff back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4DSJW View Post
RandyD, what about the confiscation of the ammo and magazines. Is confiscation of these, and similar, items also spelled out or is it discretionary. Is there any way to keep everything but the firearms under this kind of situation? Thank you for your comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTauron View Post
While I'm no attorney,its my understanding that the Federal Lautenberg Act mandates that anyone subject to a DV restraining order surrender their weapons .That's not just CA,but a nationwide regulation.Doesn't matter if the restraining order is temporary or not,you're disarmed of all firearms and ammo until its lifted.

I came across it in my military days,since "Getting Lautenberged" meant the end of your career.You can't touch a gun or ammo if you're under a DV RO even if you're active military or law enforcement- a fact many clever & mendacious military wives know all to well.
Yep, you can't be in possession of any ammo or weapons, but the Police tend to take magazines as well, even though they shouldn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyD View Post
In the restraining order documents, it specifically lists that a restrained person cannot own ammunition. Owning magazines, is not listed as a prohibited item.

As far as recovering the costs, once the OP incurs all of his costs, he can file a motion and seek a court order that the other party, pay all of his costs. I do not have any statutory authority to do this but such relief is equitable, and family law courts are courts of equity.
I went through something similar to this late last year and I couldn't get reimbursed for all of my costs.

As some may not know, if one is convicted of a DV misdemeanor, you lose your gun rights forever, because of Lautenberg, Slick Willie, and the radical feminists. It's retroactive too, so old convictions count. It's being challenged now.

I think something must be done to make some consequences for a false allegation. As of now, hysterical/vindictive/manipulative/evil women get to ruin a guy's life care and cost free.

Last edited by sirgrumps; 07-23-2013 at 8:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-23-2013, 7:28 PM
sl0re10 sl0re10 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,654
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryanv790 View Post
I was blown away when they came to my house. Like a SWAT team too, everything short of Ballistic Helmet and Assault Rifle.

But I googled the deputy's name and found out he was using "Obama Money" to fund the police to enforce the seizure of firearms. google john kovach and you will read about the funding he received to enforce the seizure of firearms for DV TRO's.
I'm anti using actual swat teams for most things but the alternative is still to surround the house, have two people knock and serve the warrant... calmly.. and not have a line of people rush you when you open the door... Vests are also reasonable...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:34 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.