Stokes vs USDOJ, CA AG - USDC, NCA - What is 'committed'?

[Librarian]

https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2019cv04613/346087/114/0.pdf?ts=1627720435

See also https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2...-rights-n48428

[taperxz]

I think i understand this and the guy can now get his grandfathers gun. Can this be explained a bit more? Is this a large win?

[TruOil]

I think i understand this and the guy can now get his grandfathers gun. Can this be explained a bit more? Is this a large win?

Not a larger win, just a proper interpretation of the applicable statute. Voluntary commitments do not count towards a lifetime ban, only involuntary commitments. Involuntary commitments must be approved by an actual judge after a hearing. Absent such a judicial proceeding, no ban.

[Librarian]

This is an interpretation of the firearms prohibition results of WIC 5150 and 5250

WIC 8103 (f)(1)(B)

(f) (1) (A) A person who has been (i) taken into custody as provided in Section 5150 because that person is a danger to himself, herself, or to others, (ii) assessed within the meaning of Section 5151, and (iii) admitted to a designated facility within the meaning of Sections 5151 and 5152 because that person is a danger to himself, herself, or others, shall not own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, or attempt to own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, any firearm for a period of five years after the person is released from the facility.

(B) A person who has been taken into custody, assessed, and admitted as specified in subparagraph (A), and who was previously taken into custody, assessed, and admitted as specified in subparagraph (A) one or more times within a period of one year preceding the most recent admittance, shall not own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, or attempt to own, possess, control, receive, or purchase, any firearm for the remainder of his or her life.

[pacrat]

taperxz I think i understand this and the guy can now get his grandfathers gun. Can this be explained a bit more? Is this a large win?

Not a larger win, just a proper interpretation of the applicable statute. Voluntary commitments do not count towards a lifetime ban, only involuntary commitments. Involuntary commitments must be approved by an actual judge after a hearing. Absent such a judicial proceeding, no ban.

TruOil gave a fairly concise summary of the judgement. But NO he cannot get Grandpas guns, YET. The judge stayed his own ruling for appeals. Like all the other 2A cases in CrapOfornia.

Judge Alsup disagreed, citing existing Ninth Circuit precedent, and ordered the state to allow Stokes to take possession of the guns left to him by his grandfather. However, Alsup also stayed his decision pending final appeal by the state, so for now Stokes is still stuck in the legal limbo created by California law.

I see it as a HUGE WIN for untold thousands of prospective gun owners who have voluntarily agreed to commitment in the past.

NO JUDGE, = NO ADJUDICATION, = NO LOSS OF 2A. If it makes it through the appeals gauntlet.

[FirearmFino]

ORDER LIFTING STAY OF RELIEF