Jump to content


Photo

Appealing CCL Review Board Denial


  • Please log in to reply
1293 replies to this topic

#61 Ed223

  • Members
  • 43 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 14

Posted 23 April 2014 - 09:36 PM

Wait for the letter, gets attached to the appeal.  Who knows, it may say something different than the generic threat to humankind version.



#62 cz 75

  • Members
  • 19 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 13

Posted 23 April 2014 - 09:42 PM

I was under board review now I am under review what does that mean

#63 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 5,402 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 23 April 2014 - 09:47 PM

I was under board review now I am under review what does that mean

Sounds to me like the board did not find the objection had any merit and has kicked you back into the review for approval/activation process queue.


NRA Life Member
ISRA Member
FFL-IL Supporter
🇺🇸

#64 Japonte

  • Members
  • 34 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 14

Posted 23 April 2014 - 09:51 PM

CZ75 - Congrats soon good - I keep checking my Denied status and praying that it would change to approve - it's like looking at a dead person and hoping they will start breathing - but I have to hope that miracles do happen.



#65 cnwfan3

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 548 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 14

Posted 23 April 2014 - 10:07 PM

Japonte, you do need to wait for the letter.  They require it as part of the appeal process.  Also make sure that you have 3 copies of the all the documentation when you go to file.



#66 Japonte

  • Members
  • 34 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 14

Posted 23 April 2014 - 10:17 PM

cnwfan3 - Thank you – I will be a little more patient and will make sure that I have all the copies on my filing day.



#67 lwod

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 14

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:31 AM

Has anyone determined how to add the additional defendants suggested if complaint was filed (Dupage County Circuit Court) naming only the ISP?



#68 jjbook79

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 14

Posted 24 April 2014 - 11:06 AM

I am currently 14 days into the 35 days the state has to respond to my summons.  I filed my appeal with the circuit court on April 11, and mailed their summons by certified mail the same day.  It should be interesting to see if they respond, and if so, with what.



#69 cnwfan3

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 548 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 14

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:28 PM

I am currently 14 days into the 35 days the state has to respond to my summons.  I filed my appeal with the circuit court on April 11, and mailed their summons by certified mail the same day.  It should be interesting to see if they respond, and if so, with what.

 

I didn't know they had to reply.  I filed the same day (4/11).  I guess as some point I should receive a reply too.



#70 PrincessFace

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 14

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:49 PM

I filed today (Cook Co) and had a similar experience as ed223 above.  I created a COMPLAINT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW based on the example provided by the moderators here.  The Room 802 people sent me to the CL16 Pro Se attorney which is back out thru security and in the basement of Daley Center. I waited  and then had a 5 minute convo with someone who determined that they could help me and gave me an appointment for a couple hours later.

Back for the appointment, the attorney took my Complaint and the letter of denial and made some changes including reducing the list of defendents to the 4 that ed223 describes.  So I left that office with the Complaint, the Summons in Administrative Review,  and a Cover Sheet.  Back thru Security and up to Rm 802 and wait in line, the clerk gave me the 4 envelopes for the Summons for each defendent and instructed to make 7 copies each of the Complaint and the Summons.  Four are for the Defendents, two the clerk keeps, and one for the Plantiff, thats me.  Then you sit at the table in 802 and fill out by hand the envelope, the reciept, and the certified return card for each defendent, their name and adress ( all 801 s 7th St. Suite 400-M).  Thats 3 pieces for each of the 4 defendants so bring a good pen and be careful.  Then back in line and the clerk stamps them and mails the 4 certified letter with a summons and complaint in each.  $338 total cost or she said you can get a waiver which I declined since Im working.

Consider going straight to CL16 in the morning so you dont have to go thru security and more than necessary.

Travel light, the second trip to 802 I didnt take my keys, cell phone, pocket change etc. to reduce the hassle at security.

Took about 45 minutes in the morning and about 2.5 hours in the afternoon.

You can make copies in 802 using your credit card, 25 cents each.

Everyone was very helpful and encouraging, and the wait didnt seem that bad.



#71 Bears34

  • Members
  • 7 posts
  • Joined: 26-March 14

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:32 PM

I also went to the Daley Center today and filed my appeal, same situation as PrincessFace, I would definitely recommend that you go to Room CL16, and have them help, printed all forms out for you, so all you have to do is go to Room 802, make copies, fill out the certified letters, and pay. Make sure you go to Room CL16 early, because its first come first serve, they open at 8:30am



#72 PrincessFace

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 14

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:29 PM

Bears34 I think I was a little bit behind you in line in Room802   :)

For those still needing to file, CL 16 is down the escalator before you go thru security.  Stop at the podium outside the room and they take your information before you can go in.  The application for legal help that you fill out asks you for information such as income, but they were willing to help me even tho Im working.

The CTA blue line is a good way to get to the Daley Center, its the Washington stop.  Or its a 10 minute walk from Union Station.

I started at 9:30 and got a 12:15 appointment.  The Library and Art institute are nearby if need something to do in between.

Thanks to the moderators and everyone who posted their experience as it helps greatly in getting thru the process.



#73 Torrence T.

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • Joined: 22-March 14

Posted 25 April 2014 - 09:22 PM

Filed my appeal today at the Daley Center.
CL-16 staff was very helpful.
Court Date 08/25/14
Thanks to all for the help we provide for each other....

#74 Ssrkid86

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 14

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:12 AM

I'm heading down to the Daley Center tomorrow to file my appeal. It is unclear on who all SHOULD be named in my complaint.

 

I have the list in Molly B's last example which includes: ISP, Hiram Grau, CCLRB, and Robinzina Bryant.

 

I also have a list suggested by others who spoke with the folks in room CL16 (at the Daley Center) for assistance and that list includes: Firearms Services Bureau, Hiram Grau, and Jessica Trame.

 

So, who all NEEDS to be named? Should I just pony up the cash and name ALL of them?

 

Also, for ALL of the potential defendants listed above, I have the address of    810 S 7th ST      is this correct?

                                                                                                                            STE 400-M

                                                                                                                            Springfield, IL

                                                                                                                            62703


Edited by Ssrkid86, 01 May 2014 - 08:20 AM.

NRA member

ISRA member

Illinois Carry member

 

 


#75 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,508 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:17 AM

I'm heading down to the Daley Center tomorrow to file my appeal. It is unclear on who all SHOULD be named in my complaint.

 

I have the list in Molly B's last example which includes: ISP, Hiram Grau, CCLRB, and Robinzina Bryant.

 

I also have a list suggested by others who spoke with the folks in room CL16 (at the Daley Center) for assistance and that list includes: Firearms Services Bureau, Hiram Grau, and Jessica Trame.

 

So, who all NEEDS to be named. Should I just pony up the cash and name ALL of them?

 

Also, for ALL of the potential defendants listed above, I have the address of    810 S 7th ST      is this correct?

                                                                                                                            STE 400-M

                                                                                                                            Springfield, IL

                                                                                                                            62703

 

 

The lawsuit filed on behalf of IllinoisCarry includes the

ISP

Director of ISP

Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board

Each board member

 

I'm not advising one way or another, just providing information.


"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 Ssrkid86

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 14

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:22 AM

Molly B - Did they send the summons to their private addresses or to the ISP address I have listed above? And did they list them individually or as an entire entity just as CCLRB?

 

I appreciate all of the information from everyone.

(Sorry, quoting doesn't work on my work computer unfortunately)


NRA member

ISRA member

Illinois Carry member

 

 


#77 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,508 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:25 AM

Molly B - Did they send the summons to their private addresses or to the ISP address I have listed above? And did they list them individually or as an entire entity just as CCLRB?

 

I appreciate all of the information from everyone.

(Sorry, quoting doesn't work on my work computer unfortunately)

 

They listed the CCL Review Board and also listed members of the board individually.


"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
  • 15,508 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:30 AM

I will see if I can find out where the summons were sent.


"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 Ssrkid86

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 14

Posted 01 May 2014 - 08:36 AM

That'd be great! Thank you!

I do not want to leave anybody off if there's a chance of a dismissal for such an error.

 

Has anybody used the 'John Doe' defendant situation that was discussed previously? This would be where you would list several 'John Doe' defendants to leave open slots to list additional defendants at a later date.


Edited by Ssrkid86, 01 May 2014 - 08:36 AM.

NRA member

ISRA member

Illinois Carry member

 

 


#80 xxxlaw

  • Members
  • 49 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 14

Posted 01 May 2014 - 02:28 PM

During the past week, we've had several new clients in our offices carrying letters from the Director, ISP that the Board has received a Law Enforcement Objection and is considering it.

 

I've reacted for these clients with an overnight Express Mail letter to the Board, confirmation signature required, asserting their due process rights to disclosure of the objection and the objector, the evidence, and the right to a fair adversary hearing. I take the position that, because this goes to the heart of anyone's fundamental, core, constitutional right of self-defense, the right cannot be deprived without a formal due process hearing.

 

At the start of the processing, in just one letter, the ISP advised that an objection was received and that the Board sustained it, causing a denial. Then some people started getting an objection letter and a denial letter dated the same day and delivered together. Then there was a period in which the objection letter and the denial were separated by a few days. This wider separation in time is a new phenomenon and I am taking advantage of these letters it to assert the rights of my clients to disclosure and a hearing.

 

Why write the letter to the Board, replying to their "objection letter"? Because I think the Board is gaming the system, that these "objection letters may" be a set-up. Should a denial ensue, the applicant who later files for administrative review and who also tries to assert that his right to fair hearing was denied him will be confronted by the Board's attorney with the fact that the applicant did nothing to assert those rights when he was informed that the objection had been received and was being considered. The appropriate response is a strong demand for those rights, which, if denied or ignored, creates a stronger argument that the objection process is an  unconstitituional deprivation of due process. Each individual letter must be carefully written and tailored to the legal best interest of each applicant. If an applicant does not assert the rights, he may injure his future options to argue unconstitutional denial of a right to a fair determination of the issue that guarantees his rights. (After all, this is a core, fundamental consitutional right - the right to self-defense - life and death may actually hang in the balance down the road - and it is no less  protected in the Bill of Rights than the right to freedom of speech, the right to marry, the privacy of one's home, and the right to vote.) This is not a trivial matter. One has the right to a fair hearing even regarding a parking ticket, but the procedures used to deny the fundamental right of self-defense in Illinois provide less procedural dignity to the applicant than a parking ticket defendant.

 

When they open these letters in Springfield, it may occur to some on the Board that I sued them last week in federal court exactly for denying the civil rights of an applicant. Perhaps that may add to the credibility of the lettters.

 

Finally, I am very concerned about what will happen with the self-filed petitions for administrative review. I think that just like in chess or checkers, you have to think several moves ahead. Many pro-se filers may think that they have the machinery in place to tell their side of it on the assigned court date. Actually, it appears that will never happen - because under administrative review, the judge is limited to considering the closed record of the Board at a hearing the applicant never knew about in many cases. On the first court date, one may expect that a Board attorney will state that he has NOT filed an answer, the "answer" in administrative review being the record below. The statute says that the Board cannot release it without the order of a court. If the applicant moves for an order requiring its production, the Board attorney may demand what is his right, five days prior written notice of the motion. The case is then continued for some period of time for consideration of the motion. If it is granted some time later, only then will the record of the Board's action finally appear in court. My concern is that the Board will run the pro-se applicants ragged, causing them to miss work to sit and wait for their case to be called on numerous court dates, only then to learn that the judge in administrative review simply cannot listen to their side of the story because his hands are tied by the law which limits him to the record below in administrative review actions. There are other ways to handle this that may play out better, but the pro-se's may not have background to pull it off. And that's a big part of the reason that we have filed civil rights counts in federal court to get behind the inherently unfair and unconstitutional procedures enacted by the legislature.

 

Obviously, none of the foregoing is legal advice, but rather general background information posted for the education of the public, and no attorney-client relationship is created with any reader of the foregoing.


Edited by xxxlaw, 01 May 2014 - 02:41 PM.

Attorney JD Obenberger - 115 South LaSalle Street, Suite 2600 - Chicago, IL 60603 - 312.558.6420 - xxxlaw at gmail.com


#81 Elmer Fudd

    CPA

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

Posted 01 May 2014 - 02:52 PM

You might want to distinguish between internal ISP appeals that don't get filed with the Circuit Court until they get a final denial and CCLRB denials which are required to be filed in Circuit Court. It might also be helpful to provide people with an idea of the amount of hours and potential fees likely to be incurred to file an action in Federal Court vs. Circuit Court, etc...I know what I have spent without having even had to prosecute a lawsuit and that is with NRA and ISRA picking up a big part of the tab. 



#82 xxxlaw

  • Members
  • 49 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 14

Posted 01 May 2014 - 03:23 PM

@ ssrkid86 -

 

The good folks who've filed an action for administrative review have their foot in the door, they've preserved their bare right to sue. But I've seen no indication that many have thought ahead to what they do next and what can go wrong. While some posted template complaints, there are, and can be, no templates of what to do next or scripts of what to say in court. The Board will not be represented by a pro-se individual. It will be a skilled attorney hired by the State during an incredibly competetive time in the legal job market, and it will be his duty to do everything (legal and ethical) in his power to torpedo the applicant. The judge will not - and cannot, consistent with the fairness of the system, - watch out for the applicant or give him special breaks. And in the end, I don't think that administrative review has the best odds to attack the procedures that are unfair. My whole aim is to avoid case-by-case arguments about who "deserves" a consitutional right and who doesn't by convincing a judge that the review process violates the constitution. I can think of arguments that have some chance in state court in administrative review, but if I had a strong conviction that it would work, I would not have filed a civil rights action in federal court. Now, there is always some chance that to deal with all of these administrative review cases, judges may collectively work some magic to the advantage of a bunch of applicants, but there is just as much a chance as that they see the applicants like a swarm of hornets and reach for the Raid, and it's not hard for all of this to become a waste of time and money. If you're gonna do it, you gotta do it smart. You either hire a lawyer or else you start doing your homework now and learn all of the issues - both procedural and substantive - and get to know the Administrative Review Law and Chancery practice like the back of your hand. If you don't do one of those things, there is a better than average chance that you will get steamrolled.

 

The Chancery Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County is not small claims court or Judge Judy. It is the deep end of the pool. Ask any lawyer.


Edited by xxxlaw, 01 May 2014 - 03:28 PM.

Attorney JD Obenberger - 115 South LaSalle Street, Suite 2600 - Chicago, IL 60603 - 312.558.6420 - xxxlaw at gmail.com


#83 ClayMontJr

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 14

Posted 04 May 2014 - 09:12 PM

I'm going to Dailey Center to file tomorrow...



#84 Ssrkid86

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 14

Posted 12 May 2014 - 12:06 PM

Has anyone found any information as to whether or not we will be able to submit a "specification of errors" form for our administration reviews?

 

"The specification of errors form is a numbered list of all the reasons why the Administrative Review hearing officer's decision was wrong."

 

I've been doing some research and came across this on a page regarding a city citation for parking that would lead to an administrative review hearing. My work computer will not allow me to copy the web link, unfortunately.


NRA member

ISRA member

Illinois Carry member

 

 


#85 kmz3301

  • Members
  • 7 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 14

Posted 12 May 2014 - 01:51 PM

There are two different letters going out.  One saying they have receive the objection and our considering it.  Those letters warrant a response as xxxlaw stated above.  However, if you receive a letter that says the Board has considered the objection and denying your license, then that is the final order of the Board and therefore you need to file an administrative review complaint.

 

There is an interesting conflict of laws between the Administrative Review Act and the Firearm Conceal Carry Act.  The Admin Review Act states that the Defendant is required to file answer to the complaint consisting of the original or certified copy of the entire record the the proceedings, including evidence it heard and the findings and decisions of the Board (735 ILCS 5/3-108).  However the Firearm conceal act states that the Board's decision, voting record and all materials considered by the Board are confidential and will not be produced unless by court order.  430 ILCS 66/20(d).  So I think people need to ask in the complaint that the board file an answer according to the Admin Review Act and alternatively the court order the Board to produce all the records according the the Firearm Conceal Carry Act.



#86 kmz3301

  • Members
  • 7 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 14

Posted 12 May 2014 - 01:52 PM

Has anyone found any information as to whether or not we will be able to submit a "specification of errors" form for our administration reviews?

 

"The specification of errors form is a numbered list of all the reasons why the Administrative Review hearing officer's decision was wrong."

 

I've been doing some research and came across this on a page regarding a city citation for parking that would lead to an administrative review hearing. My work computer will not allow me to copy the web link, unfortunately.

 

If the Board has denied your application, then I don't think this form is appropriate.  You need to file an administrative review complaint.



#87 Dfens

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 14

Posted 22 May 2014 - 06:55 PM

I had my first appearance Monday.

 

AAG Aziz appeared for the ISP and indicated that he is also handling the Thomann et al. case which is pending in Sangamon County, for those whom are unaware of its existence, it is a good read. I used a basic and simple complaint form similar to what has been posted in this thread. No motion to dismiss was made, as opposed to what I had anticipated.

 

Until i see the State's brief I cannot be certain whether or not they will argue that I have failed to name a proper defendant. My guess is that if that were the contention, they would raise it immediately. However, AAG Aziz confessed that there was still some uncertainty as to how to proceed in regards to these cases. 

 

The judge initially assigned to the case recused himself on the grounds that he is a personal friend of mine and that he had pre-judged the case. A new judge was assigned and a agreed briefing schedule was set with anticipated oral argument and at least a preliminary ruling in mid August. 


Edited by Dfens, 22 May 2014 - 07:07 PM.

The only thing that you can assume about a broken down old man is that he's a survivor.


#88 cnwfan3

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 548 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 14

Posted 22 May 2014 - 08:53 PM

Are you doing this on your own, or do you have a lawyer representing you?  Just curious since I'm not sure which way I will go about it yet.



#89 Dfens

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 14

Posted 23 May 2014 - 04:14 PM

I'm pro se but I am fortunate to associate with a number of folks with extensive experience in the legal field.


The only thing that you can assume about a broken down old man is that he's a survivor.


#90 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 15,508 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 28 May 2014 - 02:19 PM

A Cook Co appeal went to court today, AAG came before the court with the ISP's motion for entry of an order allowing production of Confidential materials and Motion for extension of time. The judge granted the defendant's motion for extension of time.  ISP's motion for order for production of confidential materials is entered and continued to June 23, 2014 at 10:00 am.  They have up to and including July 11, 2014 to file a response pleading.


"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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users