People v Tony Diaz Superior Court tosses unlawful carry conviction

[Mulamu]

https://www.hipdf.com/download-file?share_id=tCebJ3LZgqzm4JGJdHdrOw

"At the time of defendant's arrest California provided one legal means by which an individual could exercise their right to public carry- to get a license under section 26150. That path was unconstitutional. According to Shuttlesworth, faced with an unconstitutional restriction on his constitutional right, defendant was free to engage "with impunity in the exercise of the right. .. "

[nedro]

In layman's terms; Does this mean that if you have the means to lawyer up, you can conceal carry with impunity?

[BobB35]

So wait this ruling effectively says that the CA law on permitting is unconstitutional because of Breun, therefor in order to comply with Bruen the state is effectively constitutional carry.

I guarantee you the legislators have no idea this happened.

[Dirtlaw]

It's a Superior Court decision on demurrer. It can't be cited. However, it is a positive.

[rplaw]

So wait this ruling effectively says that the CA law on permitting is unconstitutional because of Breun, therefor in order to comply with Bruen the state is effectively constitutional carry.

I guarantee you the legislators have no idea this happened.

No.

What it means is that the State was unprepared or unable to rebut the Defendant's 2nd Amendment claims so the judge had no choice except to dismiss the charges.

That's it. It's nothing more than if you'd beaten the rap for a speeding ticket. Doing that doesn't invalidate the vehicle code.

[Ocdlaw]

This is really wild!

[Dirtlaw]

Does the State have the bxlls to take it further?

[RickD427]

In layman's terms; Does this mean that if you have the means to lawyer up, you can conceal carry with impunity?

So wait this ruling effectively says that the CA law on permitting is unconstitutional because of Breun, therefor in order to comply with Bruen the state is effectively constitutional carry.

I guarantee you the legislators have no idea this happened.

This doesn't change anything regarding California's laws on CCW, or Carrying a Loaded Weapon.

This decision only affects Mr. Diaz, and nobody else. It does have the potential to apply to others should the state appeal the decision, the Appellate Court upholds, and the Appellate Court opts to publish the decision, but that ain't happened yet.

The prosecutor has ten days to remedy the shortcomings that the judge found. We'll have to see if he/she/it/other makes an attempt to do so.

[Elgatodeacero]

i dont think rplaw has read the decision.

it is only 10 pages long, and it is only a trial court decision, but it pretty comprehensively addresses all the State's relevant arguments and finds them lacking. I dont see how the prosecution can remedy the defects, since these are not pleading defects but rather the court finds the entire carry permit scheme unconstitutional under Bruen.

I would not carry concealed or openly based on this trial court decision, but the writing is on the wall and we will have an appellate decision soon enough.

It seems clear the criminal cases will define the right to carry much quicker than civil cases due to fewer procedural hurdles for criminal defendants and the right to speedy trial.

[Spanky8601]

i dont think rplaw has read the decision.

it is only 10 pages long, and it is only a trial court decision, but it pretty comprehensively addresses all the State's relevant arguments and finds them lacking. I dont see how the prosecution can remedy the defects, since these are not pleading defects but rather the court finds the entire carry permit scheme unconstitutional under Bruen.

I would not carry concealed or openly based on this trial court decision, but the writing is on the wall and we will have an appellate decision soon enough.

It seems clear the criminal cases will define the right to carry much quicker than civil cases due to less procedural hurdles for criminal defendants and the right to speedy trial.

Got it. In Two Weeks.

[BAJ475]

So wait this ruling effectively says that the CA law on permitting is unconstitutional because of Breun, therefor in order to comply with Bruen the state is effectively constitutional carry.

I guarantee you the legislators have no idea this happened.

Yes and it's reasonable to conclude that once they discover what happened while they were busy trying to figure out how to screw the gun community, they and the Governor and the AG will be changing their underwear! From may issue to permitless carry in one step. How about that!

[nedro]

Yes and it's reasonable to conclude that once they discover what happened while they were busy trying to figure out how to screw the gun community, they and the Governor and the AG will be changing their underwear! From may issue to permitless carry in one step. How about that!

Are they moving to Idaho?

[Foothills]

And the legislature is so committed to de-criminalizing marijuana that they would need to pass clarifying legislation that carrying a firearm while consuming alcohol or drugs is prohibited. Many shall issue states have such prohibitions.

[DolphinFan]

Congratulations to the Judge who actually read the Bruen Decision.

Because the decision says:

"

[June 23, 2022]

Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court.

 In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), we recognized that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of an ordinary, law-abiding citizen to possess a handgun in the home for self-defense. In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. "

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/20-843#writing-20-843_OPINION_4

I look forward to more decisions like this and Constitutional Carry across the nation with the Constitution as our permit.

[BAJ475]

Are they moving to Idaho?

I doubt it because unlike CA there are no state NFA restrictions in Idaho. So while you are getting closer to being free, CA still has a way to go.

Edit. One other thing. Marijuana is illegal in Idaho!