Jump to content


Photo

Wrongfully Denied for "Court Ordered Treatment for Alcoholism"


  • Please log in to reply
194 replies to this topic

#61 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:13 PM

My ISP denial letter stated "has been in court ordered treatment for alcohol in the past 5 years". Do you have a final disposition of your case? Unless there was any ongoing Treatment for Alcohol in the past 5 years they should not be able to deny you. They may file an objection to the board based on history.

#62 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:17 PM

 

I have to agree that ISP is applying a May Issue standard to a Shall Issue Law. I don't believe they're confused either. They seem to be digging hard to deny based on verbage. It's probably better to slog through this than wait to re-apply. We should prevail in a matter of time. It is frustrating.

 
I don't see that they're digging hard, just that they're enforcing the law as written. The law clearly says treatment for alcoholism is a prohibiting criterion, so if the court documents list that as part of the sentence, what is the ISP supposed to do? they can't ignore it.


Agreed. My reference was to the Treatment verbage. They inquired with my Court Officer on what the different levels in Lake County indicate. 

#63 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:17 PM

Heh believe me when I say this, it is not fun, having NO IDEA what is going on while trying to fix a problem...and not knowing the problem. My case, well at first I thought it was a subjective question (since it said "ever" I figured that...well, I was wrong is the point heh) then was denied and immediately began calling every agency that could possibly have records, thinking that they got names mixed up. Turns out it was that damn question. Before I found out that it was the question itself, I was told by the Circuit Clerk in the county where I was arrested and charged for my DUI that DUI classes are considered court-ordered treatment as far as the legal system is concerned only to ensure compliance with the recommendations made by the evaluator. I did not point out treatment vs counseling since that was never brought up. After the treatment vs counseling difference was brought to light, I began to second guess what she had told me, but I believe that she ignored the treatment component altogether in her statement about it being court-ordered. I get that part, but the fact that my eval clearly states that treatment is not recommended, that's what screwed with me. It's the latitude given by the Unified Code of Corrections (730 ILCS 5/) to prosecutors and judges in regard to terms of supervision and also the changes to the statutory law within the past 11 years. A lot has changed, I never had to deal with any PO or appear in court on the date of discharge from supervision. All I had to do was not get in trouble and complete the required pre-appearance eval, the 22 hrs of classes, attend the VIP, and pay the fine and costs. The Motor Vehicle Code just has "standard" (no aggravators) definition of DUI, section 11-501 violation. What happens after that is up to the SA and judge. I just have trouble wrapping my head around this concept of the judiciary operating somewhere along the lines of "Hey put whatever you want in an offender's case file...alcoholism treatment, alcohol counseling, whatever same thing" as they are not, obviously there is a huge difference, and courts love uniformity. One clerk putting alcoholism treatment in the case file and another putting alcohol counseling in the case file, all else equal, should never happen. 30 year old alcoholism treatment denial? I was not informed that could occur...or hold up on appeal at least as the law there is pretty clear assuming the circumstances would still result in a Class A and not a felony. The ISP FSB doesn't care with the fact that I have one DUI and had completed supervision over a decade ago. They knew that they had really screwed the pooch on that question. The problem is with the entire process as in they hadn't considered that some (or many) would be erroneously denied based on something like what happened to me or what happened to anyone who has had a DUI thats coming back to bite them. The affidavit which I had to modify and submit, that should not be part of the process. Originally I was going to be forced to write a lettee saying "oops I screwed up" which is how they handle when a FOID applicant accidentally answers one of the disqualifying questions with a "Yes" or qualifier with a negative. I could understand that if these were paper apps and I hadn't just paid $151 to the state...as well as a permit denial based on that is not something I wanna deal with. But it's online. There oughtta be a portal to submit any documentation relating to a denial because of some wishy washy wording in the statute in order to refute the denial. Would've made my life easier, you guys would be a lot better off and it would be cheaper for the state than to have to pay an AAG to defend all of the denials in court. Then again....yeah , never mind this is Illinois. Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#64 cls74

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,163 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 13

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:21 PM

[quote name="slayer38115" post="768321" timestamp="1403302219"][quote name="cls74" post="768318" timestamp="1403301940"]
[quote name="slayer38115" post="768308" timestamp="1403300752"]
[quote name="IronSam" post="768301" timestamp="1403300064"]
There is no appeal in the Courts for an ISP denial that I know of. That is the domain for Board of Review denials. You may not have more than one DUI as enumerated in Section 25 of the Law. Residential (in patient) or Court ordered Treatment for Alcoholism is another prohibitor in the Law. The issue here is that ISP is viewing the required DUI Education and Risk Reduction Classes as Treatment for Alcohoism due to varied language and terms used in the 100+ Court Jurisdictions in the State. Anyone with 2 or more DUI's, especially within the past 5 years will be denied as it is prohibited in the CCL Act.
[/quote]
Yes, but based on what the ISP is doing, it doesn't matter if you have one or two DUI's, the treatment rule is going to win every time.  I can't see this being the intent when the law was written.  It could go a long way to helping by having some clarification from the author of the bill. 
 
If it is just a language problem, then I'll just have to reapply in 2017 after five years have passed from my case being cleared.[/quote]

Therein lies the problem. It doesn't matter the age of the DUI, but the wording of the docket by the circuit clerk of that county. Mine is over 5 years, but I will still be denied because it says "alcoholism treatment sentenced in force". All 5 years was supposed to mean is you couldn't have 2 DUI'S within the 5 years preceding your date of application.
Even if they change the wording in all 102 counties, you still have x number of.counties that have the differing language in it causing the denial up until the change is made.
There won't be any asterisks for predated DUI'S. So if it were to get changed tomorrow and someone gets a DUI tomorrow night, they could still apply on Monday as long as it was heir only one in the past 5 years. The common language statewide on court ordered classes would have them basically exempted from the hassles we are going through.
[/quote]
What you posted before, the copy of your court docket, shows a date in 2010.[/quote]

Yeah, the DUI was 2009, thought it was earlier than that. That was when the plea was entered. I've been thinking it was 08/09 all this time. I don't know what date they go by but it shouldn't matter either way as you are allowed one within 5 years.

So looks like I'll be waiting until December anyway. Who knows what changes by then, both chambers will be rearranged with the elections and retirees and a lame duck session will follow.

#65 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:23 PM

+1



#66 Dr. Rat

    JMHO

  • Members
  • 2,369 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:28 PM

 

 

I have to agree that ISP is applying a May Issue standard to a Shall Issue Law. I don't believe they're confused either. They seem to be digging hard to deny based on verbage. It's probably better to slog through this than wait to re-apply. We should prevail in a matter of time. It is frustrating.

 

I don't see that they're digging hard, just that they're enforcing the law as written. The law clearly says treatment for alcoholism is a prohibiting criterion, so if the court documents list that as part of the sentence, what is the ISP supposed to do? they can't ignore it.

 

A big part of the arguement, mine anyway, is it says "court ordered treatment", when the state mandates the requirement and the court oversees implementation. Therefore DUI sentences should not be included.

 

 

Isn't that what happens though? Is there a standard sentence for DUI or is each one tailored for the individual case? I thought a judge could skip the treatment all together if he didn't think it was appropriate, no?

 

ETA: Just read skinny's post above. That answered my questions.


Edited by Dr. Rat, 20 June 2014 - 04:33 PM.


#67 Pendy

  • Members
  • 9 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 13

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:30 PM

I have been checking my application on ISP website about once a week, maybe a bit longer in between checks.  I just noticed today that the ISP now has the appeal form posted on my/your application page itself, to which they say to fill it out and attach copies of any records you wish to use in your appeal, and to send it online.  It says nothing about mailing.  It's been well past the 60 day appeal deadline for me, and I still have not heard anything from ISP about my appeal.  Would it be worth a try for everyone who mailed their afidavit to submit the appeal online, or wait until we actually hear from ISP (mailed letter or change in status)?


Edited by Pendy, 20 June 2014 - 04:30 PM.


#68 cls74

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,163 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 13

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:32 PM

I don't know when my 5 years started/ended.

I received the DUI, lawyer kept leading me on that it wasn't going to hold. Issuing cop didn't sign it where it clearly stated not valid unless signed.

I went on my own and had the evaluation done and took the 10 hours of class the following week well before I ever stepped into court.

I haven't been following for so long I thought that if your docket said alcoholism treatment "ever" you would still be denied. That's my fault there, but it still shouldn't be this way when it's a single DUI offense. Not talking aggravated DUI or multiples, but a one time offense with supervision.

Now I have to figure out when that "5 years" takes place. Date of arrest, conviction, discharge from supervision?

#69 slayer38115

  • Members
  • 41 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 04:35 PM

I have been checking my application on ISP website about once a week, maybe a bit longer in between checks.  I just noticed today that the ISP now has the appeal form posted on my/your application page itself, to which they say to fill it out and attach copies of any records you wish to use in your appeal, and to send it online.  It says nothing about mailing.  It's been well past the 60 day appeal deadline for me, and I still have not heard anything from ISP about my appeal.  Would it be worth a try for everyone who mailed their afidavit to submit the appeal online, or wait until we actually hear from ISP (mailed letter or change in status)?

Molly B got an answer from the ISP about this a few days ago.  You do not need to do the online appeal if you filed it in another way.



#70 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 20 June 2014 - 09:42 PM

The applicant has to appeal the ISP denial within 60 days but there is no time limit set by law for them to process the appeal. There are standard levels of DUI Education required by Statewide Law depending on BAC results or the refusal to submit. The issue is the various terminologies used by different courts for basically the same thing, DUI School. If cls74's Alcoholism Sentence is the term in his county for DUI School he should be able to resolve it.

The DHS website states that the DUI Evaluation and Education are required to restore driving privileges. That would mean it's required to satisfy the Secretary of State and administered by the Court.

The ISP seems to be trying to resolve the Treatment issue by determining Treatment of What? If an appeal shows the term was generically used to describe DUI School then the applicant should prevail. My Compliance Officer told me that it's treatment for Driving Under the Influence and nothing more. You may also ask the DUI Education facility that you attended if they can provide any documentation to clarify the nature your attendance.

Edited by IronSam, 20 June 2014 - 10:08 PM.


#71 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 21 June 2014 - 09:40 AM

Now I have to figure out when that "5 years" takes place. Date of arrest, conviction, discharge from supervision?


Wouldn't be date of arrest. Wouldn't be date of conviction because, if you took supervision, technically the date of discharge is the date of conviction (for purposes of LE). I would say it's whenever you finished your classes, at least that would be the logical choice if you want to be specific. If you wanna low ball that number, date of discharge from supervision. That's the safe bet, also the longest. What is it now, two years for DUI supervision? The judge in my case seemed like he was downright sick of his job, he was pulling double duty for a while, criminal and traffic court. Out of over 100 (this is a tiny county) defendants, I was one of two who had an attorney. The rest negotiated some pretty sweet plea bargains given what they had been cited for, no insurance and a half dozen other moving violations, kept the no insurance and tossed everything else.

Florida threw a fit when my DUI popped on the print check even though I had sent them a certified dispo. Sent me a letter saying they'll deny my license if I don't furnish them with court documents. Called, spent 5 minutes on the phone (total) and had my license issued while I was on the phone with a woman at the FL Dept of Agriculture & etc. This state, well, it would be a lot easier on everyone if you could just send whatever documentation they require to make a decision based on the written law (not based on some subjective criteria or using the issuing agency's own, special dictionary), someone will take a look at it and give the applicant thumbs up or thumbs down, and process accordingly. But hey that's way too easy.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2


NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#72 Sparky8603

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 117 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 14

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:30 AM

:drool: Interesting topic .... So lets see my last DUI was in the early 70's so I will get denied for something 43 years ago?



#73 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:36 AM

+1

#74 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:45 AM

Is there someone on these forums that can speak with the bill's author?  I think waiting for terminology to be changed is a long shot.  I'd like to know what the legislator's intent was by separating DUI from alcohol and drug treatment.  I would think a state rep or senator would be familiar with DUI law and know what the sentencing was.  If the two requirements were meant to be one and the same, then writing a DUI rule into the bill wouldn't have been necessary.

 

 

Both requirements are in the law. 

 

1. Can't have more than two DUIs in the past 5 years.

 

2.  Has not been in residential or court-ordered treatment for alcoholism, alcohol detoxification, or drug treatment within the 5 years immediately preceding the date of the license application;

 

It is possible to have more than 2 DUIs in 5 years and no court-ordered treatment = disqualified.

It is possible to have only 1 DUI in the past 5 years plus court ordered treatment = disqualified.

It is possible to have no DUIs and still have court ordered treatment = disqualified.

 

The key is to have fewer than 3 DUIs and nothing in your record or court documents referring to "treatment".  If the word "treatment shows up anywhere, the application will most likely be denied and an appeal which includes proof of no court ordered treatment will be necessary.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#75 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:48 AM

I don't know when my 5 years started/ended.

I received the DUI, lawyer kept leading me on that it wasn't going to hold. Issuing cop didn't sign it where it clearly stated not valid unless signed.

I went on my own and had the evaluation done and took the 10 hours of class the following week well before I ever stepped into court.

I haven't been following for so long I thought that if your docket said alcoholism treatment "ever" you would still be denied. That's my fault there, but it still shouldn't be this way when it's a single DUI offense. Not talking aggravated DUI or multiples, but a one time offense with supervision.

Now I have to figure out when that "5 years" takes place. Date of arrest, conviction, discharge from supervision?

 

If you were not sentenced to court ordered treatment for alcoholism, then the 5 years does not pertain to you.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#76 Sparky8603

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 117 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 14

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:56 AM

Molly back in the very 70's they didn't even have court ordered treatment for a DUI. That was put into the law much later I can't remember the exact year.



#77 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:58 AM

I might add, I only posted in this to see if I should hold off on applying until this is resolved or is it simple enough procedure for a single DUI offense, no property damage, injuries or other factors, to get taken care of.

It sounded like the docket transcript was going to need changed for anyone needing it if and before the standard verbage is introduced.

 

 

I would suggest you wait for the paper application.  Ask the Circuit Court Clerk for a signed statement explaining the terminology on the docket.  Sign an affidavit stating you were not sentenced to court ordered treatment.  Attach all the court documents and those pertaining to the classes you took.  Submit all with your application.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#78 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:59 AM

Molly back in the very 70's they didn't even have court ordered treatment for a DUI. That was put into the law much later I can't remember the exact year.

 

Only DUIs in the past 5 years count.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#79 Dr. Rat

    JMHO

  • Members
  • 2,369 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 14

Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:14 AM

 

I might add, I only posted in this to see if I should hold off on applying until this is resolved or is it simple enough procedure for a single DUI offense, no property damage, injuries or other factors, to get taken care of.

It sounded like the docket transcript was going to need changed for anyone needing it if and before the standard verbage is introduced.

 

 

I would suggest you wait for the paper application.  Ask the Circuit Court Clerk for a signed statement explaining the terminology on the docket.  Sign an affidavit stating you were not sentenced to court ordered treatment.  Attach all the court documents and those pertaining to the classes you took.  Submit all with your application.

 

 

Are those paper apps still on schedule for July 1st?



#80 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:29 AM

Yes, if not before.
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#81 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 21 June 2014 - 01:56 PM

Molly. The digital upload button on my dashboard is disabled. Is it possible or advisable to upload a supplement to my paper appeal via the Appeals email address? I have a final disposition showing DUI School , Level 2 Moderate. My Compliance Officer said she spoke to an ISP rep asking specifically if Level 2 Moderate constitutes Treatment for Alcoholism and after a conversation they both concured that it does not. If ISP makes that determination, how long might it take for them to move my  denial to approved as the initial denial letter stated?



#82 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 21 June 2014 - 02:01 PM

Molly. The digital upload button on my dashboard is disabled. Is it possible or advisable to upload a supplement to my paper appeal via the Appeals email address? I have a final disposition showing DUI School , Level 2 Moderate. My Compliance Officer said she spoke to an ISP rep asking specifically if Level 2 Moderate constitutes Treatment for Alcoholism and after a conversation they both concured that it does not. If ISP makes that determination, how long might it take for them to move my  denial to approved as the initial denial letter stated?

 

I don't think it's necessary for you to submit any other documents at this point.  I have asked how long should we expect it to be before licenses are issued in these cases.  Will let you know as soon as a I hear anything.  In the meantime, keep an eye on your status and let me know if there is any change.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#83 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 22 June 2014 - 09:14 AM

Thanks Molly. Every day.

#84 cls74

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,163 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 13

Posted 22 June 2014 - 10:02 AM

I'll be uploading 2 Sangamon county documents, personal info blacked out of course. I think they should be sufficient as is and should eliminate any confusion.

Hopefully anyhow, curious to see what Molly thinks.

#85 cls74

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,163 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 13

Posted 22 June 2014 - 10:26 AM

Here are the documents, hopefully this works.

 

The first one is from the instructor of the risk education classes and it clearly states that it is risk education and the dates attended.

 

The second one Is the court ordered Supervision stating what I was assigned to. I had already taken the classes prior to my court date. It also clearly states to complete 10 hours of alcohol and drug remedial education and shows what other levels there are each being a higher category of risk assessment and treatment. To me this should be sufficient.

 

Also,  I was off by a year on when I thought I received it. so 5 years would be June of next year, could have sworn it was this year but documents don't lie lol

 

 

Attached Files



#86 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,472 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 22 June 2014 - 05:36 PM

I think these docs. should be sufficient.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#87 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 01 July 2014 - 12:45 PM

Still denied by ISP with a pending appeal filed on April 17th. I tried to reach firearms services today. They have new menu options including foid and ccl appeal status. They did not answer, and that mailbox is full. I made a call to my State Rep. JoAnn Osmond's office to ask for some help or guidance on the issue. The young lady I spoke with will contact ISP and get back to me.

#88 Elmer Fudd

    CPA

  • Members
  • 5,899 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 13

Posted 02 July 2014 - 07:36 AM

The same mailbox - Option 3 is for both FOID and FCCL appeals. I thought that since today is the start of the tenth month since I filed a FOID Appeal I would give it a try...and surprise I was able to leave a message in the mailbox......we are certainly seeing major progress now they actually take messages



#89 IronSam

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 14

Posted 02 July 2014 - 08:31 AM

Good to hear that there is some movement. Hopefully to a timely resolution. Let us know if you get a call back?

#90 Elmer Fudd

    CPA

  • Members
  • 5,899 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 13

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:00 AM

Good to hear that there is some movement. Hopefully to a timely resolution. Let us know if you get a call back?

I was thinking about holding my breath.  :frantics: 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users