Americans under felony indictment have a right to buy guns, judge rules

[Kurr]

Americans under felony indictment have a right to buy guns, judge rules

Counts said that while the U.S. Supreme Court decision did not erase societal and public safety concerns about guns, it had "changed the legal landscape."


"The Second Amendment is not a 'second class right,'" Counts wrote. "No longer can courts balance away a constitutional right."

Quiroz had been indicted in a Texas state court for burglary and later for bail jumping when he attempted in late 2021 to buy a 22-caliber semiautomatic handgun, leading to his federal indictment.

A federal jury on June 23 found him guilty of one count of illegal receipt of a firearm by a person under indictment and one count of making a false statement during the purchase of a firearm.

That same day, the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority handed down its ruling, which struck down New York's concealed carry law. Quiroz then moved to have the case dismissed, citing that decision.

Counts granted the request, saying a historical survey found "little evidence" that the federal ban "aligns with this Nation’s historical tradition."

 

[DadSmith]

Americans under felony indictment have a right to buy guns, judge rules

So a person is innocent until proven guilty?

 

[Onebad06vtx]

So a person is innocent until proven guilty?

It had to be taken to court to figure that out.
Under our illegitimate presidents policy,everyone one is guilty if there not a democrat!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

It had to be taken to court to figure that out.
Under our illegitimate presidents policy,everyone one is guilty if there not a democrat!

Where other than a federal court would 18 USC 922 be "figured out"?

Bruen happened in June, 922 has been around since 1968. There will be a bunch of litigation post-Bruen.

 

[Kurr]

So, what occurs if you have been found guilty of a law that has since been ruled to be unconstitutional? Is there any remedy to your conviction? Is that an injury or tort you could sue for?

 

[Bill of Rights]

So, what occurs if you have been found guilty of a law that has since been ruled to be unconstitutional? Is there any remedy to your conviction? Is that an injury or tort you could sue for?

It almost seems that would come under ex post facto, if the conviction happened under a prior understanding of the law. Looking at it from the other direction, if it came to their notice that you owned a .700 Nitro Express without a tax stamp and you subsequently obtained said stamp, I don't know that your past, now rectified, transgression would still be actionable. I also do not know that it would not, esp given the political climate wherein the mere desire to own a gun makes some believe you to be mentally ill. Given, though, that you suffered a harm (loss of liberty), there might be cause for an action.

I'm looking forward to the reply from someone who knows what he's talking about.

Blessings,
Bill