Class 4 Felony Aggravated UUW W/No FOID Vacated (People v Williams)

[LoveLife25]

This message pertains to individuals without a valid FOID that were charged under the AGG UUW statute.

 

Judge Coghlan out of Cook County whose opinion says he dismissed all charges of AGG UUW w/ NO FOID on defendent this past December 2013 because all elements of the misdemeanor FOID card act are identical and the whole AGG UUW statute violates the proportionate penalties clause of the IL constitution according to him.

I heard this opinion was sent to the Supreme Court from the state for a decision. Let's give it a year and hopefully anyone that has a Class 4 felony wiill receive this relief like the defendant did in this case. See attached .pdf

 

 

Long story short: So, anyone with a AGG UUW charge with NO VALID FOID can fight for a misdeamenor class A since the AGG UUW NO FOID has the same elements of the misdemeanor no FOID by filing the right motions or if the supreme court confirms Judge Coghlan's opinions, you are all in luck. Let's cross our fingers.

JudgeCoghlanOpinion.pdf

[mauserme]

It's good to see lower courts deciding cases based on recent higher court rulings.

 

This part strikes me as particularly significant:

 

....

Applying the above analysis to the present case, it is clear in light of the decision ins Aguilar the elements of both the Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapons statue and the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act are substantively identical, i.e., 1) that the defendant was in possession of a firearm; and 2) that when he did so he was not in possession of a valid FOID card. In that the AUUW is punishable as a class 4 felony and the FOID Card Act as a class A misdemeanor, their penalties are disproportionate and the AUUW is unconstitutional both as applied to defendant and on its face.

...

[Sigma]

Its unconstitutional on its face.

I like to hear that

[LoveLife25]

It's good to see lower courts deciding cases based on recent higher court rulings.

 

The appellate court is only reversing convictions on AGG UUW charges if you had a valid FOID card.

According to them the AGG UUW NO FOID felony is still constitutional to this day.

Judge Coghlans opinion says even if you never had a FOID, THAT AGG UUW NO FOID is unconstitutional but of course he is in a lower court.

The state appealed his opinion and sent it directly to the Supreme Court.

If this plays out in our favor, this will be huge.

[mauserme]

I get the impression that if he had been charged with a misdemeanor under FOID that might have stuck. That's purely hypothetical though.

[LoveLife25]

Yes it would have but the problem is, is that police departments in illinois automatically want to give you a class 4 felony under the AGG UUW. A misdemeanor class A no foid still ensures your citizenship and employment. Whereas a class 4 felony with the same elements means you are a scumbag to the country and employers. Plus you get your voters rights revoked.

[defaultdotxbe]

Plus you get your voters rights revoked.

In IL you can vote again as soon as you are out of jail

 

I think the bigger reason they seek the felony charge is because a felon becomes a prohibited person and can never own a gun again

[LoveLife25]

Plus you get your voters rights revoked.

In IL you can vote again as soon as you are out of jail

 

I think the bigger reason they seek the felony charge is because a felon becomes a prohibited person and can never own a gun again

 

Having this class 4 felony hurts every job application and you can't leave the country. Correct me if I'm wrong? It's so hard to find someone to rent you a home or apartment with that unconstitutional felony. Terrible!

[defaultdotxbe]

Having this class 4 felony hurts every job application and you can't leave the country. Correct me if I'm wrong? It's so hard to find someone to rent you a home or apartment with that unconstitutional felony. Terrible!

Yes this is true (my brother has a class D felony) but I was merely addressing voting

[xd9subcompact]

I get the impression that if he had been charged with a misdemeanor under FOID that might have stuck. That's purely hypothetical though.

Yes, they overcharged. I think they can still come back with a Class A unless the statute of limitations has run or if double jeopardy has attached.

All the judge is saying is that the felony charge under the AUUW law is dismissed.

 

And what I remember from Aguilar was he couldn't have a FOID due to his age, his parents were required to sign off on it, but the FOID law required that the parents be able to hold a FOID themselves, but they were not eligible either. He was in a catch 22. On that basis he was found to be treated as if he had a FOID because the state left him with no recourse.

 

So if someone has a FOID or was improperly denied a FOID, they really can't be charged with a AUUW anymore. But then again, the addition to the law of the FCCA may have changed the law enough to make the Aguilar decision no longer applicable. Or Aguilar still applies if you are ineligible for a FCCL due to age. (no FOID means no FCCL)

[mauserme]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mention of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

[LoveLife25]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mentioned of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

Absolutely correct. Defendent never had a FOID card. And he was 24. This is better than the Aguilar opinion because it gives an opportunity to those charged with class 4 AGG UUW without FOID cards another chance at full American citizenship. but the only problem is that it happened in Cook County and not in the Appellate or Supreme Court. Rumor has it that this case was sent to the Supreme Court because the state continues to argue this was a mistake by the judge and they want to prove that the AGG UUW no foid is constitutional. Let's hope the Supreme Court sticks to Judge Coghlans opinion. We won't know for 1-2 years though.

[cshipley92]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mentioned of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

 

I think you're right mauserme. The judge laid out his reasoning very clearly and concisely and I don't see how the Illinois Supreme Court, whose ruling he based his reasoning on, could overturn this.

 

What does it mean in the long run for us if it stands? No FOID or FOID holder and no FCCL with loaded firearm would be a class A misdemeanor instead of a felony?

[LoveLife25]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mentioned of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

 

I think you're right mauserme. The judge laid out his reasoning very clearly and concisely and I don't see how the Illinois Supreme Court, whose ruling he based his reasoning on, could overturn this.

 

What does it mean in the long run for us if it stands? No FOID or FOID holder and no FCCL with loaded firearm would be a class A misdemeanor instead of a felony?

 

If the Supreme Court decides to agree with this case, it'll be a future class A misdemeanor under the FOID card act. For those with AGGRAVATED UUW NO FOID felony convictions, that charge can be expunged with a post conviction petition. It's all a waiting game now. I heard through the grapevine that a Kane County judge also decided this way last week. The problem is, Individual judges opinions have little or no bearing on other cases unless the Supreme or Appellate courts get involved to make a final opinion on constitutionality.

[cshipley92]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mentioned of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

 

I think you're right mauserme. The judge laid out his reasoning very clearly and concisely and I don't see how the Illinois Supreme Court, whose ruling he based his reasoning on, could overturn this.

 

What does it mean in the long run for us if it stands? No FOID or FOID holder and no FCCL with loaded firearm would be a class A misdemeanor instead of a felony?

 

If the Supreme Court decides to agree with this case, it'll be a future class A misdemeanor under the FOID card act. For those with AGGRAVATED UUW NO FOID felony convictions, that charge can be expunged with a post conviction petition. It's all a waiting game now. I heard through the grapevine that a Kane County judge also decided this way last week. The problem is, Individual judges opinions have little or no bearing on other cases unless the Supreme or Appellate courts get involved to make a final opinion on constitutionality.

 

Yeah, I get that. It all takes time doesn't it. One more battle in the war to win back our rights.

[RockerXX]

and you can't leave the country. Correct me if I'm wrong?

 

You can leave the US with a felony without issue as long as it's all done and over with, the question more so is will the country you are going to allow you to enter, many countries won't allow felons to enter... Canada has been known to not only bar felons from entry, but also bar entry for some charged with misdemeanors and even DUIs... In most cases if you have a conviction (especially felonies) on your record you will need to contact the country of travel well in advance and get clearance to enter or obtain a pre-authorized visa... It can be a huge hassle depending upon the politics of the conviction and the atmosphere of your convicted crime in said country... For example in a gun unfriendly country having a gun conviction is not going to be a good thing and will usually get you at minimum flagged and hassled...

[xd9subcompact]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mention of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

I'm going to find it. It may be the issue was contained in the appellate court decision or I have the wrong defendant. I remember this.

 

Here it is, I had the wrong person.

 

http://capitolfax.com/2013/03/27/cook-county-judge-rules-gun-law-unconstitutional/

[LoveLife25]

Age wasn't a factor here - he was 24 at the time of the arrest. And I don't recall any mention of him being denied a FOID card, only that he didn't have one. It was decided 12/18/2013 so although the existence of the FCCA could have influenced the ruling, it didn't.

 

It seems to broaden the implications for AUUW beyond no FOID or improperly denied, imo.

I'm going to find it. It may be the issue was contained in the appellate court decision or I have the wrong defendant. I remember this.

 

Here it is, I had the wrong person.

 

http://capitolfax.com/2013/03/27/cook-county-judge-rules-gun-law-unconstitutional/

 

Oh that's People v Mosley. He was underage and couldn't obtain a FOID card. So he was charged with a reduced misdemeanor.

The argument is almost the same in both cases, but of course the result you want is the one I posted, a complete dismissal of all AGG UUW NO FOID charges, which have the same elements as the misdemeanor FOID card act. Therefore it's unconstitutional. Judge completely tossed out the case.

 

Hopefully Supreme Court agrees to his correct decision.

Too bad this **** doesn't get broadcasted on the news.

[Chicago312]

I stumbled on this forum when searching for further information regarding a class 4 auuw being considered unconstitutional in Illinois v. Aguilar. I too, was convicted in 2010 of a single count of auuw. After 2008, the city of Chicago also added an additional felony possession of a firearm without a foid card charge to every gun case as well. Come to find out, in my situation the states attorney never charged me with this, just a single count of auuw. I tried contacting lawyers but this issue seems fresh cause none have info regarding this matter and those that do know want $2,500-$3000 to even touch the case! Kind of hard to cough up that kind of green when trying to find work the past few years been heck. Does anyone have any new updates and is there a way where I can file the case myself instead of going through a lawyer?

[TomKoz]

Can't the State just amend the FOID act to make it a felony rather than a misdemeanor ??

[xd9subcompact]

They could but that requires a majority vote in the house, senate and the governor has to sign it into law. The house would be a impediment to passage.

[Molly B.]

I stumbled on this forum when searching for further information regarding a class 4 auuw being considered unconstitutional in Illinois v. Aguilar. I too, was convicted in 2010 of a single count of auuw. After 2008, the city of Chicago also added an additional felony possession of a firearm without a foid card charge to every gun case as well. Come to find out, in my situation the states attorney never charged me with this, just a single count of auuw. I tried contacting lawyers but this issue seems fresh cause none have info regarding this matter and those that do know want $2,500-$3000 to even touch the case! Kind of hard to cough up that kind of green when trying to find work the past few years been heck. Does anyone have any new updates and is there a way where I can file the case myself instead of going through a lawyer?

 

You might look into what legal aid is available in the Chicago area.

http://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/about/probono.html

[Chicago312]

 

I stumbled on this forum when searching for further information regarding a class 4 auuw being considered unconstitutional in Illinois v. Aguilar. I too, was convicted in 2010 of a single count of auuw. After 2008, the city of Chicago also added an additional felony possession of a firearm without a foid card charge to every gun case as well. Come to find out, in my situation the states attorney never charged me with this, just a single count of auuw. I tried contacting lawyers but this issue seems fresh cause none have info regarding this matter and those that do know want $2,500-$3000 to even touch the case! Kind of hard to cough up that kind of green when trying to find work the past few years been heck. Does anyone have any new updates and is there a way where I can file the case myself instead of going through a lawyer?

 

You might look into what legal aid is available in the Chicago area.

http://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/about/probono.html

 

 

Thanks for the link and I just filed a motion to vacate my auuw charge this morning. I appear in front of my initial judge May 2. Then hopefully I'll be appointed a PD that knows what he/she is doing.

[Chicago312]

Just an update regarding my situation, I filed a motion to vacate a felony agg. UUW charge over 7 months ago after I found this website. My motion was finally granted this month but now it seems that the states attorney wants to reinstate the no foid card charge. According to three lawyers before I filed the motion, stated that I was never charged with the no foid card; apparently I was! Guess they just wanted an easy $2,500 out of me! And all three made it crystal clear about their no guarantee policy. Damn snakes!, but the lawyers has access to my court files and all three claim that there wasn't a foid card charge! I was charged with four counts of agg. uuw, two counts of illegal possession of a firearm and two counts of possession of a firearm on a public street. No charges of unlawful possession without a FOID CARD which has a code along the lines of A-3A.

Back to the situation, when the states attorney moved to reinstates the the no foid card charge, the judge asked for another two weeks to verify if he still has jurisdiction over the matter since it's a four year old case. I thought the statute of limitations in Illinois for a gun case is three years? Can the states attorney reinstates a charge even after 4 years? Does the judge still have jurisdiction over this matter? I figured I'll ask since it's was this form that helped me successfully file and have my motion granted. My next and last court appearance is scheduled for two weeks and any advice is appreciated!

[Elmer Fudd]

Very simple answer.....the only person that is qualified to respond is an attorney that you have retained......the consequence of being wrong isn't worth taking.

[Chicago312]

bull****, I had to withdraw my motion today or be prepared to fight a reinstated no foid card charge that faces a mandatory 1-3 years with no probation. Can't afford to cough up $3500 plus 18 months if decision doesnt go in my favor. I hit a dead end but it was worth a try. Just hope the Supreme Court up holds Judge Coghlan's decision.

[Mr. Fife]

Something sounds fishy about all of this.

[johnsxdm]

bull****, I had to withdraw my motion today or be prepared to fight a reinstated no foid card charge that faces a mandatory 1-3 years with no probation. Can't afford to cough up $3500 plus 18 months if decision doesnt go in my favor. I hit a dead end but it was worth a try. Just hope the Supreme Court up holds Judge Coghlan's decision.

Mandatory 1 to 3, how is it all the gang bangers get away with no FOID?

[Trevis]

bull****, I had to withdraw my motion today or be prepared to fight a reinstated no foid card charge that faces a mandatory 1-3 years with no probation. Can't afford to cough up $3500 plus 18 months if decision doesnt go in my favor. I hit a dead end but it was worth a try. Just hope the Supreme Court up holds Judge Coghlan's decision.Mandatory 1 to 3, how is it all the gang bangers get away with no FOID?

DA's and courts that just don't care to see actual justice. The FOID is an infringement of a right plain and simple, and simple possession of anything shouldn't be a crime. This is the state we've allowed ourselves to exist in.

[chislinger]

The FOID should be voluntary, the benefit of owning one should be no waiting periods. It obviously has no value in preventing crime.