12031(e) hijinks and question.

[Liberty1]

I could see 148 PC (Delaying peace officer) as a possible result and some DAs might actually charge and then you're in CA criminal court on the defensive which is not where we want to be.

UOCers have debated this concept using retention or a 'non-draw' holster.

[dantodd]

I could see 148 PC (Delaying peace officer) as a possible result and some DAs might actually charge and then you're in CA criminal court on the defensive which is not where we want to be.

UOCers have debated this concept using retention or a 'non-draw' holster.

Interesting. I wonder if that would work, especially considering that if one is FORCED to assist in gathering evidence that might convict them later it is also a 5th amendment issue as well as 4th.

[pullnshoot25]

Re: 12031(e) hijinks and question.

Let's just say that I am transporting 40 gun rags in my car and 39 of them have an airsoft pistol or similarly weighted/shaped item and only one has a firearm.

Now, let's say that I am detained for a traffic violation and the officer sees a gun rag and asks if I have any firearms in the car. I give an honest answer and he demands to do an (e) check.

I know that 12031(e) prevents me from refusing the (e) check but does it compel me to identify WHICH bag has an actual gun in it? Does it give the officer the right to go though every bag and unlock/inspect each bag?

Are each of the bags searched getting to the magic bag a separate 42 U.S.C. 1983 violation?

Interesting scenario. The same answer goes to drugs as to cops... JUST SAY NO!

[hoffmang]

This is sort of what I am getting at. Is it implied within the statute that the officer can perform any search he desires to find the firearm? I only see that he can inspect the firearm itself. If he can conduct a search for the firearm what prevents him from searching your entire car simply ignoring the gun rug until he has exhausted all other areas within the car?

As for federal and constitutional issues, I don't really see 12031(e) standing up to constitutional review so this is all likely irrelevant in the long run.

The original California case upholding 12031(e) was a case in which a police officer found drugs in a trunk on a campus - People v. De Long, 11 Cal. App. 3d 786.


The case I was looking for Federally is United State v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797. Recall that Judge Gould is on the Nordyke panel.

-Gene

[dantodd]

The original California case upholding 12031(e) was a case in which a police officer found drugs in a trunk on a campus - People v. De Long, 11 Cal. App. 3d 786.


The case I was looking for Federally is United State v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797. Recall that Judge Gould is on the Nordyke panel.

-Gene

and he had some interesting things to say in concurrence too IIRC.

[snobord99]

This is sort of what I am getting at. Is it implied within the statute that the officer can perform any search he desires to find the firearm? I only see that he can inspect the firearm itself. If he can conduct a search for the firearm what prevents him from searching your entire car simply ignoring the gun rug until he has exhausted all other areas within the car?

As for federal and constitutional issues, I don't really see 12031(e) standing up to constitutional review so this is all likely irrelevant in the long run.

I think that under state law (or at least what a state court would say) is that they could search anywhere they reasonably believe the firearm to be. So say the only RS or PC he has that you have a firearm is that you volunteered info that you have a rifle, he can't then go into your glovebox or center console because he can't reasonably expect to find a rifle in there (it just wouldn't fit). Remember, a state court has already said "yea, even if you're not around, they can go ahead and open up the car to 'inspect' the firearm if they know the firearm is there."

And no, I don't think you not saying "it's in this bag" can constitute refusal.

[snobord99]

The case I was looking for Federally is United State v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797. Recall that Judge Gould is on the Nordyke panel.

-Gene

It doesn't seem that that case helps all that much as the court seems to distinguish between this case:



and this case:

.

While I don't have the pictures of the actual case in question in the case, I think it looked more like the latter than the former. The court didn't so much say "gun case isn't probable cause" as they did "gun case that general public can't tell is gun case isn't probable cause."

[stitchnicklas]

i keep a Jason Davis card in my sunvisor mirror 24/7.......

[Veggie]

I didn't know an 12031(e) check applied to stowed firearms. Thought it was only open carried firearms. That's a load of bull crap that needs to be done away with.

[pullnshoot25]

Re: 12031(e) hijinks and question.

I didn't know an 12051(e) check applied to stowed firearms. Thought it was only open carried firearms. That's a load of bull crap that needs to be done away with.

Yep.

[N6ATF]

12031(e)

[Uxi]

Do the airsofts have orange tips?

[Falstaff]

Do the airsofts have orange tips?

Nope, just the guns do! Seriously though, if you have 40 gun rugs and tell him "Here's the only one that's a real gun" Do you really think he's not gonna want to look at all 40? You're talking about CA cops here, 99% of all CA cops would go on a 40 bag fishing expedition.

[dantodd]

I didn't know an 12031(e) check applied to stowed firearms. Thought it was only open carried firearms. That's a load of bull crap that needs to be done away with.

Yep. Any gun carried pursuant to 12031 can be inspected. If you refuse the inspection you have committed a misdemeanor. One of the things I was trying to figure out is just how far "refusing" an inspection reaches.

Also, of interest is that only firearms carried pursuant to 12031 are subject to inspection any other firearms are not subject to such inspection and it is quite likely that if you are carrying per 12050, for example, and a cop searches your vehicle or inspects said weapon that he has performed an illegal search; even if 12031(e) were somehow not prima facie unconstitutional.

[GrizzlyGuy]

Yep. Any gun carried pursuant to 12031 can be inspected. If you refuse the inspection you have committed a misdemeanor. One of the things I was trying to figure out is just how far "refusing" an inspection reaches.

Other than the free ride and maybe a free meal at the jail, it doesn't look like you're in much legal jeopardy if you were otherwise complying with 12031. 12031(e) says:

Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to
this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of
this section.

The section is 12031 (loaded firearms). If the gun is unloaded (or legally loaded) then you didn't violate that section and thus committed no crime.