bjm Posted February 24, 2014 at 01:59 AM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 01:59 AM Does anyone know of any arguements that could be brought up in court just in case the states attorney or judge tries to fight against vacating the auuw charge(720...a3A)? My big court date is tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:02 AM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:02 AM If it's a 3 a, that means you were carrying a firearm other than a handgun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:07 AM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:07 AM might need just a smidgen more of information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:16 AM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:16 AM Does anyone know of any arguements that could be brought up in court just in case the states attorney or judge tries to fight against vacating the auuw charge(720...a3A)? My big court date is tuesday. Have you looked at the Williams ruling LoveLife25 posted yesterday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:17 AM Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:17 AM Sorry about that had to pull up my motion and it is 720 Act 5 ILCS 24-1.6 (a) (1) (3) (A) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:18 AM Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:18 AM Does anyone know of any arguements that could be brought up in court just in case the states attorney or judge tries to fight against vacating the auuw charge(720...a3A)? My big court date is tuesday. Have you looked at the Williams ruling LoveLife25 posted yesterday? Reading now, but I had a valid FOID card at the time of arrest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:22 AM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:22 AM If it occurred before the FCCA amended UUW/AUUW I don't think there is anything they can do, especially if you had a FOID. The statute was ruled unconstitutional in Aguilar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:26 AM Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:26 AM If it occurred before the FCCA amended UUW/AUUW I don't think there is anything they can do, especially if you had a FOID. The statute was ruled unconstitutional in Aguilar I hope so, I've talked to a few lawyers and they told me that they may give me a hard time as I'm going pro se. So I'm praying for the best. My stomach is in knots and I'm ready to take my concealed carry class :ahappy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango7 Posted February 24, 2014 at 03:19 AM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 03:19 AM Sorry about that had to pull up my motion and it is 720 Act 5 ILCS 24-1.6 (a) (1) (3) (A) (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6) Sec. 24-1.6. Aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. (a) A person commits the offense of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon when he or she knowingly: (1) Carries on or about his or her person or in any vehicle or concealed on or about his or her person except when on his or her land or in his or her abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm; or (2) Carries or possesses on or about his or her person, upon any public street, alley, or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village or incorporated town, except when an invitee thereon or therein, for the purpose of the display of such weapon or the lawful commerce in weapons, or except when on his or her own land or in his or her own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm; and (3) One of the following factors is present: (A) the firearm, other than a pistol, revolver, or handgun, possessed was uncased, loaded, and immediately accessible at the time of the offense; or Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phatty Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:48 PM Share Posted February 24, 2014 at 02:48 PM Sorry about that had to pull up my motion and it is 720 Act 5 ILCS 24-1.6 (a) (1) (3) (A) (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6) Sec. 24-1.6. Aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. (a) A person commits the offense of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon when he or she knowingly: (1) Carries on or about his or her person or in any vehicle or concealed on or about his or her person except when on his or her land or in his or her abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm; or(2) Carries or possesses on or about his or her person, upon any public street, alley, or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village or incorporated town, except when an invitee thereon or therein, for the purpose of the display of such weapon or the lawful commerce in weapons, or except when on his or her own land or in his or her own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm; and(3) One of the following factors is present: (A) the firearm, other than a pistol, revolver, or handgun, possessed was uncased, loaded, and immediately accessible at the time of the offense; orThat's the new version of the statute. I'm assuming bjm was charged under the old version, which did not have the "other than a pistol, revolver, or handgun" language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 25, 2014 at 02:37 AM Share Posted February 25, 2014 at 02:37 AM The way the new statute reads, if the act was an uncased, loaded handgun and the person had a valid foid, and there are no other factors, this is the wrong charge. According to Aguilar, this should be a dismissal. The state could re-file under the UUW law. At least that would take Felony off the table.Pro-Se = Acting as one's own attorney. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 25, 2014 at 02:40 AM Share Posted February 25, 2014 at 02:40 AM · Hidden by mauserme, February 25, 2014 at 10:55 PM - No reason given Hidden by mauserme, February 25, 2014 at 10:55 PM - No reason given oops duplicate Link to comment
bjm Posted February 25, 2014 at 10:36 PM Author Share Posted February 25, 2014 at 10:36 PM yes i was charged under the old stattue. Well the judge granted the motion and now I'm awaiting the SA's response if they accept it or not. The SA asked where did I get my motion, it's well written, . That sounds at least good to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango7 Posted February 25, 2014 at 11:19 PM Share Posted February 25, 2014 at 11:19 PM yes i was charged under the old stattue. Well the judge granted the motion and now I'm awaiting the SA's response if they accept it or not. The SA asked where did I get my motion, it's well written, . That sounds at least good to me. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveLife25 Posted February 26, 2014 at 03:23 AM Share Posted February 26, 2014 at 03:23 AM If you had a valid FOID card, I know a lawyer that can vacate your AGG UUW charge but he would charge $2500. He's been successful at vacating these convictions for many people. If interested, message me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 26, 2014 at 03:48 PM Share Posted February 26, 2014 at 03:48 PM Do you mean he charges $2500 to get a AUUW felony conviction vacated or he charges $2500 to represent someone to get a AUUW felony charge dismissed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 26, 2014 at 05:48 PM Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 at 05:48 PM 2500 is way too rich for my blood right now. Especially with the rock solid motion I turned in. I really can't see a defense in this, it's unconstitutional, I'm still in jurisdiction of the court, why and how would SA deny me? To waste time and taxpayers money on little ol me? It's going to get vacated one way or another I'm just taking the lower cost option first. I've filled out an affidavit of assets and liability to obtain a public defender just in case I have to go to trial on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 26, 2014 at 09:32 PM Share Posted February 26, 2014 at 09:32 PM I'm confused. First, this was your "big court date"? It sounds like a pre-trial hearing. Second, assuming you filed a motion to dismiss based on the fact that this statute is invalid, then if the judge granted the motion, shouldn't it be over? Or did the judge allow you to enter the motion and he/she is allowing the SA to rebutt that motion before making a final decision on grant/deny the motion to dismiss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 26, 2014 at 10:43 PM Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 at 10:43 PM I'm confused. First, this was your "big court date"? It sounds like a pre-trial hearing. Second, assuming you filed a motion to dismiss based on the fact that this statute is invalid, then if the judge granted the motion, shouldn't it be over? Or did the judge allow you to enter the motion and he/she is allowing the SA to rebutt that motion before making a final decision on grant/deny the motion to dismiss? Yes the 2nd part, the judge is allowing the SA to "rebutt" the motion before making the final decision. Also that judge was sitting in for the actual judge in that courtroom. So the actual big court date is in April. The judge sure gave them a long time to due so, I didn't want to raise any arguments about it so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 27, 2014 at 06:50 PM Share Posted February 27, 2014 at 06:50 PM Are they going to re-file under 24-1, UUW?? If it was a loaded, uncased gun, that seems to be where they will go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 27, 2014 at 07:37 PM Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 at 07:37 PM Are they going to re-file under 24-1, UUW?? If it was a loaded, uncased gun, that seems to be where they will go. Could you be more specific as to which statute? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 27, 2014 at 09:31 PM Share Posted February 27, 2014 at 09:31 PM Well. If it was a loaded, uncased firearm, I would go with http://www.ilga.gov/...000050K24-1.htm ILCS 720 5/24-1 A 4. (Assuming you weren't in a bar or a school at the time) (4) Carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person except when on his land or in his own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (4) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions: (i) are broken down in a non-functioning state; or (ii) are not immediately accessible; or (iii) are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card; or (b Sentence. A person convicted of a violation of subsection 24-1(a)(1) through (5), subsection 24-1(a)(10), subsection 24-1(a)(11), or subsection 24-1(a)(13) commits a Class A misdemeanor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveLife25 Posted February 28, 2014 at 07:20 AM Share Posted February 28, 2014 at 07:20 AM Get a public defender immediately if you cannot afford an attorney. This is something you can't keep going back to court for if the judge denies your motion. You need to get this case dismissed without going to trial. ASAP. I gaurantee it can be done with an attorney. I can't gaurantee you can do it alone but you have a chance because of People V Aguilar Supreme Court's decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted February 28, 2014 at 01:31 PM Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 at 01:31 PM So they can re-file under a different statute? Yea I filled out my affidavit so I could have a public defender appointed to me on my next court date if they deny my motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted February 28, 2014 at 06:43 PM Share Posted February 28, 2014 at 06:43 PM Since the state has not yet tried you for a crime, double jeopardy has not attached to the case. It would be a different situation if they had tried you for the AUUW and then when they lost, tried to re-file under the UUW law. They can't try twice on an the same act.It sounds like your worst case scenario is going to be the Class A misdemeanor charge under the UUW law. And that is eligible other than a conviction. http://www.criminallawyerillinois.com/2011/02/13/what-is-a-class-a-misdemeanor-in-illinois/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted February 28, 2014 at 07:18 PM Share Posted February 28, 2014 at 07:18 PM bjm -- contact me so we can flush out your situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted March 1, 2014 at 03:42 AM Author Share Posted March 1, 2014 at 03:42 AM bjm -- contact me so we can flush out your situation I've sent a you an email to your aol address as you can't receive any pm's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm Posted March 1, 2014 at 03:46 AM Author Share Posted March 1, 2014 at 03:46 AM Since the state has not yet tried you for a crime, double jeopardy has not attached to the case. It would be a different situation if they had tried you for the AUUW and then when they lost, tried to re-file under the UUW law. They can't try twice on an the same act.It sounds like your worst case scenario is going to be the Class A misdemeanor charge under the UUW law. And that is eligible other than a conviction. http://www.criminall...or-in-illinois/ Has this been tried before regarding an auuw case? Even a misdemeanor isn't cool. It's funny how I was in school for nursing now I'm in school for business and law. I want to get back to nursing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xd9subcompact Posted March 2, 2014 at 04:43 PM Share Posted March 2, 2014 at 04:43 PM I'm not sure what you mean. Based on your posts, you have not yet been tried for this crime. They can amend charges all the way up to the point of your trial. They can add charges, drop charges. When they modify the criminal complaint, all you get is some more time to prepare. Once "jeopardy" attaches, then they are committed to the crime they tried you for and not another. http://legal-diction...opardy Attaches If you are otherwise a clean record, my guess is that on a Class A Misdemeanor, you can get something that results in an alternate punishment that leaves the public record free of the conviction.Once the state decides the AUUW isn't the right charge, they might offer that to you to help dispose of the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper6 Posted March 2, 2014 at 09:48 PM Share Posted March 2, 2014 at 09:48 PM I would try to get an appointment with the State's Attorney to discuss it well before court; then you you will have some idea of what you are up against as far as whether or not he will be opposing your motion. Also, the State's Attorney will have a lot more time (and therefore be more willing) to listen to what you have to say at an office appointment than a busy court day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.