Rel3 Posted June 17, 2016 at 12:46 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 12:46 PM Someone I know was recently charged with an misdemeanor uuw while foid carry gun in arm rest unloaded and magazines in glove compartment they are saying it was immediately accessible also it is yukon truck with no trunk need legal help or advise of course it was in Chicago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matkinson Posted June 17, 2016 at 01:03 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 01:03 PM If the facts of the case are as you state (person has a FOID, firearm was unloaded and in the glove compartment), it sounds like the police should not have charged the person with UUW. I would advise your friend to retain an attorney. Search the forum for information about Chicago attorneys -- I don't know one that I can recommend for this purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnCrypt Posted June 17, 2016 at 01:42 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 01:42 PM I agree with matkinson, It's actually pretty clear read the Illinois supreme court ruling on it: http://www.illinoiscourts.gov/opinions/supremecourt/2009/october/106367.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted June 17, 2016 at 02:45 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 02:45 PM Someone I know was recently charged with an misdemeanor uuw while foid carry gun in arm rest unloaded and magazines in glove compartment they are saying it was immediately accessible also it is yukon truck with no trunk need legal help or advise of course it was in Chicago Consulting a lawyer is the best course. There is some need for clarification here. The term armrest often refers to the widened part of the interior side of the door. It often has open spaces for temporary storage of maps and other small items. If that is what you are describing, then the gun would not be completely enclosed. That would probably not conform to the law and the decision cited by EnCrypt. If the gun was in the center console, it would be enclosed and thus compliant with the law. Section 24–1.6©(iii) of the Criminal Code of 1961 provides that a person is not guilty of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon if that weapon is “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.” 720 ILCS 5/24–1.6( c )(iii) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tab Posted June 17, 2016 at 02:59 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 02:59 PM One important detail, was the compartment latched? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 03:38 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 03:38 PM I went with a 2005 yukon, not sure what it was. Also, the correct term would be transport rather than carry. But if it's under the door armrest, not going to fly. http://images.gtcarlot.com/customgallery/interior/39076591.jpg If it's in the center armrest, should be good to go as long as it doesn't have a busted latch or missing lid. http://images.gtcarlot.com/pictures/61675936.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefferson24 Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:12 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:12 PM Why does it matter if the lid of the center console is able to latch? Was that part of the console decision? I would think as long as the lid is fully closed you should meet the definition of enclosed. Had a policeman tell me one you could enclose a firearm in a closed brown paper bag and still be legal provided it was unloaded and you had a foid. I think the Wildlife Code does go into the need for a case to be fastened in some way. Can or do regular municipality law enforcement usually enforce the Wildlife Code even though the incidents have nothing to do with hunting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stm Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:28 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:28 PM Why does it matter if the lid of the center console is able to latch? Was that part of the console decision? I would think as long as the lid is fully closed you should meet the definition of enclosed. Had a policeman tell me one you could enclose a firearm in a closed brown paper bag and still be legal provided it was unloaded and you had a foid. Yes, that was part of the ruling. Once the IL Supreme Court ruled that the center console was a container for the purposes of UUW/transport, they remanded the case back to the original court. The police claimed the console was not latched, but Mr. Diggins claimed it was. That is a fact for the jury to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:41 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:41 PM Why does it matter if the lid of the center console is able to latch? Was that part of the console decision? I would think as long as the lid is fully closed you should meet the definition of enclosed. Had a policeman tell me one you could enclose a firearm in a closed brown paper bag and still be legal provided it was unloaded and you had a foid. I think the Wildlife Code does go into the need for a case to be fastened in some way. Can or do regular municipality law enforcement usually enforce the Wildlife Code even though the incidents have nothing to do with hunting? My concern was most center consoles are spring loaded lids. Push the button and it will open on its own. That's why my insurance/registration is not in the same compartment as a firearm. Don't need a gotcha moment with an open compartment looking for my registration with a firearm in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rel3 Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:42 PM Author Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 04:42 PM It was the center console n was latch they are saying it was immediately accessible n the lawyer have been around 2500 on top of bond money and the confiscated the firearm all for being a law abiding citizen in Chicago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:01 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:01 PM I'm glad I don't live in Chicago. The Diggin's case should be all that is needed to hand the public defender or states attorney and receive an apology and an order to release any bond forfeited along with the confiscated firearm and ammunition. They can't cite some kind of local ordinance either because the CCL bill included FOID holders in the same preemption on handguns. Good luck to your friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:09 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:09 PM Very respectfully, I would suggest that the other details of stop would affect this; for example if he was in possession of a controlled substance. Are there other charges? Those might need to be dealt with first. If not, get a lawyer. If there is any reason to believe that your friend was profiled based on ethnicity, have that lawyer mention 42 USC 1983. I mention this because it is a deprivation of a civil right, but a tough sell for a white guy. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rel3 Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:16 PM Author Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:16 PM No drugs or achoal involved just a seatbelt violation and misdemeanor uuw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:22 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 05:22 PM Keep us informwd on what is going on and how it turns out. If that is all it is, it should be pretty cut and dry on getting it tossed. I've never had to, and never will, deal with Chicago/Cook matters. It is way different than the rest of us deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted June 17, 2016 at 06:29 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 06:29 PM I see nothing in the law or the Illinois Supreme Court decision that the “case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container" has to be latched. Perhaps someone can find the specific words that apply. I think a box with a lid that fits over the sides of the box would be legal, as would a cloth sack closed with a draw string. They are containers that enclose the gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stm Posted June 17, 2016 at 06:44 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 06:44 PM From the IL SC ruling: Our determination that the center console is a “case” within the meaning of section 24–1.6©(iii) does not end this case. A factual question remains as to whether the exception is applicable based on whether the firearms at issue here were “enclosed” in the center console. For this reason, we remand the matter to the circuit court for a new trial. In light of our decision, we must consider whether a new trial would subject defendant to double jeopardy. See People v. Jones, 175 Ill. 2d 126, 134 (1997); People v. McDonald, 125 Ill. 2d 182, 201 (1988). Officer Boland testified that the console was ajar; defendant and his passenger testified it was closed. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, it is possible that the jury could have believed Officer Boland’s testimony over that of defendant and his passenger. Accordingly, we find there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and, thus, double jeopardy does not preclude a new trial. See People v. Hope, 116 Ill. 2d 265, 279 (1986). However, we note that nothing in our opinion should be construed as a finding regarding defendant’s guilt that would be binding upon remand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 06:52 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 06:52 PM I see nothing in the law or the Illinois Supreme Court decision that the “case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container" has to be latched. Perhaps someone can find the specific words that apply. I think a box with a lid that fits over the sides of the box would be legal, as would a cloth sack closed with a draw string. They are containers that enclose the gun.Again, I was only inferring if the lid was not able to remain closed(spring loaded). For some reason it will not allow me to edit that into my original post. As far as transporting unloaded I'd imagine a zip loc bag would suffice. Not sure if theycould xgallenge immediately accessible on that though so not suggesting attempting, especually in NE IL. Only if it is loaded would the concealed or mostly concealed apply and the occupant has a valid CCL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnCrypt Posted June 17, 2016 at 07:02 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 07:02 PM Not sure if theycould xgallenge immediately accessible on that though the FOID act states (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. so you don't have to qualify under all of those. you have to qualify for one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rel3 Posted June 17, 2016 at 07:21 PM Author Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 07:21 PM He don't have a lot of funds for an lawyer so if he plead guilty will he still be eligible for an foid or Ccl since it's an misdemeanor uuw ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted June 17, 2016 at 07:47 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 07:47 PM It was the center console n was latch they are saying it was immediately accessible n the lawyer have been around 2500 on top of bond money and the confiscated the firearm all for being a law abiding citizen in ChicagoImmediately accessible only applies if the gun is loaded.As for pleading guilty, from the FOID Act regarding eligibility for a FOID card: (2) Submit evidence to the Department of State Police that: (i) He or she is 21 years of age or over, or if he or she is under 21 years of age that he or she has the written consent of his or her parent or legal guardian to possess and acquire firearms and firearm ammunition and that he or she has never been convicted of a misdemeanor other than a traffic offense or adjudged delinquent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 09:12 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 09:12 PM Can he do a FOIA and get the police report. See what the officer put in there for how it was stored and why it was immediately accessible? If it states it was in the center console with ammunition in the glove box(not that they have to be separate aside from not in the gun) he'd be better off submitting that along with citing the Diggins case than pleading guilty even without a lawyer. If there's not more to the story, I know I would never plead guilty and surrender my rights. $2500 sounds like a lot, but asking for an extension and finding an understanding attorney it isn't out of the realm of possibilties to achieve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerus Posted June 17, 2016 at 09:26 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 09:26 PM For some reason it will not allow me to edit that into my original post.Only supporting members can continue to edit their posts after a certain period. He don't have a lot of funds for an lawyer so if he plead guilty will he still be eligible for an foid or Ccl since it's an misdemeanor uuw ?I would NOT plead guilty even if it wouldn't lead to a revoked FOID. Far too many police and courts strong arming people into paying outrageous fines for bogus charges that are really just a tax on the poor. Have him take in a copy of the law, relevant cases and police report and represent himself. How was the gun discovered btw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 17, 2016 at 10:10 PM Share Posted June 17, 2016 at 10:10 PM For some reason it will not allow me to edit that into my original post.Only supporting members can continue to edit their posts after a certain period. Oops, didn't realize my membership had expired. That explains it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted June 18, 2016 at 12:32 AM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 12:32 AM He don't have a lot of funds for an lawyer so if he plead guilty will he still be eligible for an foid or Ccl since it's an misdemeanor uuw ? Perhaps he should represent himself, plead not guilty and show appropriate statutes to the judge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitter Clinger Posted June 18, 2016 at 11:21 AM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 11:21 AM Some questions: I assume your fried knew he had his gun in the car. If it was indeed enclosed in the center console, how did the cops find out about it? Was there an illegal search of the car or did he consent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbacs Posted June 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM Why would he not have the handgun in the glovebox?And what was he stopped for in the beginning?Does he have access to the Internet so he can actually type here to fill "helpers"in with information?There is a list/thread in here somewhere with local lawyers out there, call till he gets one willing to push a Pro2A subject! Second to last......Welcome to the Forums!Lastly, no lawyers here and if there were, they wouldn't give advice out in the open over the Internet on a forums board. Best advice given already here based upon the little known facts.........get a lawyer and say as little till you do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mqqn Posted June 18, 2016 at 12:14 PM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 12:14 PM Unless there are extenuating circumstances, as described there is not a states attorney in Illinois that would charge on this as it is not against the law. I submit the April 2012 shift briefing from the ISP still on the ISP site: http://lmscnt.ileas.isp.state.il.us/production/cninv000000000002831/content.pdf The home rule clause precludes any local jurisdiction from changing the law in their corner of the state so the law is the law everywhere. As far as latching goes, the SC remanded the case back to the circuit court only because the Diggins console lid was broken and when closed did not conceal the firearms that were inside; the officer could see the revolver from outside the truck when he approached Diggins. The crux was that he could see it, not whether the lid was latched. If the "armrest" has a lid that completely contains the firearm when closed, it would meet the requirement of a "case". If there is no lid then you are in trouble. Again - there is either some other circumstances which have not been fully disclosed, or this is another case of the Chicago gone crazy politics, the latter of which is going to make them look very bad for infringing on this person's rights. best mqqn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rel3 Posted June 18, 2016 at 06:33 PM Author Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 06:33 PM He was originally stop for no seatbelt while parked upon the officers asking for his credentials he informed them he was foid carrying and the location of the firearm from there he was arrested and charged they never ask for the foid until at the police station and they didn't give him a police report just an court date Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted June 18, 2016 at 07:16 PM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 07:16 PM They won't give him the report, he will have to do a FOIA request for it. They will redact key names and personal info but the gist of it should be there. If it is as you describe he should never see any charges pressed. He needs to get that police report to see what the arresting officer wrote in it. Get it before the initial court appearance. If it is not correct, he needs a lawyer. Not sure what fines and loss of bond will amount to but take that into consideration when weighing the costs of an attorney or just accepting the charges(I would never accept even if I had to sell, pawn and borrow). And if he is using the same terminology as you, please stop that as well. You are not FOID carrying, you are legally transporting. Saying FOID carry to a LEO is probably not the best thing to do, especially in your part of the state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumperj Posted June 18, 2016 at 07:55 PM Share Posted June 18, 2016 at 07:55 PM Call around till you get a pro 2A lawyer. They're out there. A good one will weigh the facts and his income. Maybe a payment plan can be worked out. Tell your friend not to talk until he sees an attorney. First consultations are usually free or at least they use to be. If nothing else, they can advise him on a course of action to take. Good luck to your friend. And welcome to IC. And like has been said... "Legally transporting", Not "FOID carrying" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.