People denied for court ordered treatment----Read this!

[mau]

The ISP have changed the wording of one of the questions on the Concealed Carry Application.

They have omitted the language including in ever been in inpatient or outpatient treatment for alcohol. That question now only asks:Have your ever been adjudicated by a court as a mental defective or ordered by a court, board or authorized entity to an in-patient or out-patient mental health?

 

 

So many people have had their application denied because they answered the question about alcohol treatment either inpatient or outpatient. There remains a question about alcohol treatment for alcoholism, alcohol detox, or drug use in the last 5 years, but that is not generally the treatment one receives for a dui.

 

I contacted my state rep because I believed the ISP were incorrectly asking the question on the actual permit. I received an affidavit from the ISP to correct this mistake.

 

 

Affidavit for FCCA application (disabled).pdf

 

and mail this to:

Illinois State Police

Concealed Carry Section -Attn: Affidavit

801 South 7th Street, Suite 400M

Springfield, Illinois 62703

[wtr100]

doesn't apply to me but nice work getting that out there

[AFigmentOfYourImagination]

doesn't apply to me but nice work getting that out there

 

+1

[Dr. Rat]

 

So many people have had their application denied because they answered the question about alcohol treatment either inpatient or outpatient. There remains a question about alcohol treatment for alcoholism, alcohol detox, or drug use in the last 5 years, but that is not generally the treatment one receives for a dui.

 

 

Actually it asks specifically about court-ordered alcohol treatment. That would sure seem to include court-ordered treatment after a DUI within the past 5 years.

[Dr. Rat]

Maybe that's yet another mistake and should read drug treatment, since that's the actual disqualifying criterion...

[mau]

Maybe that's yet another mistake and should read drug treatment, since that's the actual disqualifying criterion...

 

Yeah, looks like they changed two questions and they still don't have it correct.

[domin8]

They misspelled inpatient and outpatient.

[skinnyb82]

Looking at my (still denied) application, I have now answered "Yes" to being "ordered by a court, board, or authorized entity to an in-patient or out-patient mental health?" they forgot to include "institution" as per the verbiage in the Criminal Code. The MHDD uses "facility." They had how long to rephrase the question and omitted a word that is material to the question itself....*sigh*

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[IronSam]

My application denied for "Court ordered Alcohol Treatment" within the past 5 years but the law allows for a single DUI. Yes? I was not ordered by the court, but as a matter of State Law since 1988 for anyone charged with DUI to submit to a certified intervention program over which the court has no discretion. I completed the classes nearly a month before facing a Judge. Is there an Affidavit to cover this or is it a Catch 22. My understanding of the law is for a Judge's order for treatment of Alcoholism or Drug Addiction. Correct?

 

Thanks for All Replies.

[Dr. Rat]

My application denied for "Court ordered Alcohol Treatment" within the past 5 years but the law allows for a single DUI. Yes? I was not ordered by the court, but as a matter of State Law since 1988 for anyone charged with DUI to submit to a certified intervention program over which the court has no discretion. I completed the classes nearly a month before facing a Judge. Is there an Affidavit to cover this or is it a Catch 22. My understanding of the law is for a Judge's order for treatment of Alcoholism or Drug Addiction. Correct?

 

Thanks for All Replies.

 

Did you answer the question "yes" or did ISP come up with this in their background check?

[IronSam]

It must have been the background check. I answered No because it was not ordered by the court, but apparently entered into the record after the fact.

[skinnyb82]

You said it wasn't in the past 5 years, right? When they query the HHS, thats where I bet it popped. That or when they ran a background and found the DUI and looked at the disposition. If the recommended level of classes is not more than 22 hrs you could make an argument that you were not treated for anything, that it was counseling, not treatment. I'll post the affidavit which I modified and sent in to the ISP to get my status changed. I think they're disseminating it right now anyway so whatever. They cannot just enter judicial orders years after the fact and date them as if they were just entered.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[IronSam]

It was last year, so yes, it was in the past 5 years. My question is the Criteria for the Permit. As I understand it, anyone charged with DUI must participate in an Education and Risk Reduction program, which is what I did. My classes were a total of 22 hours. Is there not a distiction between counseling mandated by law for a DUI Arrest and a Court Ordered Treatment for Alcohol as grounds for denial?

[skinnyb82]

Back when applications were first submitted, multiple people including myself had emailed the ISP asking for a clarification but no one could get a straight answer from the ISP as to their definition of "treatment" so that's why I answered "Yes" before the question had changed from "ever" to "within the past 5 years." I will say that when I was going back through the paperwork for my DUI, I looked at the Risk Assessment and the counselor had recommended 22 hours. 12 hours of DUI Risk Education and 10 hours of Early Intervention (this was back in 2003 and I know stuff has changed to 10 hours of DRE and 12 hrs of Early Intervention). The level above "Early Intervention," or below depending on how you look at it, contains the word "Treatment." As does the level above that one. Take a look at your Alcohol Risk Assessment paperwork, specifically the last page or whichever one has the counselor's recommended level of classes/treatment/whatever. It should be similar to mine with a few changes due to the amendments to the statutory law but it appears as though clinicians and the ISP have a different definition of treatment. My Rep was actually wanting to see how they would treat someone who had received DUI-Supervision and 22 hrs of classes within the past 5 years. Now we know what happens. Email Todd (his email address is in his profile) with the specifics, if you have a 2A-friendly Rep or Senator, that will help as well. Also, call the DHS and ask to speak with someone in DASA (Drug and Substance Abuse or something like that), I had them query their database in case some erroneous records were in there. The woman I spoke to was very polite and helpful. I spoke to her, she asked for my SSN to query the database for any records, called me back 30 min later and let me know she found nothing.

 

Here is a PDF of the affidavit which I had to submit to the ISP. Not sure if this is usable but I still wanna put it out there for anyone who got jammed up the way I did...by overthinking stuff. I was told it's OK to disseminate this since the ISP has cleared it.

 

Affidavit - FCCA Application (Drug or Alcohol Treatment).pdf

[IronSam]

Thanks Skinny,

 

Pretty similar situation.

 

I answered NO on the application as my understanding of treatment is for Alcoholism as stated in the law. My completion certificate from NICASA indicates completion of their "Moderate Risk Program, which consited of 10 hours Risk Recuction Education and 12 hours of outpatien counseling". The word Treatment is nowhere on the certificate. I sent Todd a note on this and his reply whas there seems to be a distiction. I copied this from the published law...but what to do about it?

 

Public Act 098-0063

HB0183 Enrolled LRB098 05760 MGM 35799 b

(5) 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

[skinnyb82]

Uh...so you were denied because of treatment for alcoholism or alcohol detox? That's the literal language of the law as I read it. Denying you for alcohol classes...not quite the same as alcohol detox (for alcoholics) or alcoholism treatment (for...ding ding, alcoholics). They've seriously skewed the legislative intent of the law itself. Gimme a little time, I would like to help I just need to figure out how to. I wish I had gone to law school heh.

 

It sounds as if you're gonna have to take this in front of a Circuit Court Judge and basically say "Here's the section containing prohibitors, here's the language on the application, here's my paperwork showing I DID NOT receive any treatment per se, yada yada." I'm no attorney but I would get a counselor to sign off that DRE and Early Intervention is, in his or her opinion as an expert (certifiable) to put something in writing, stating that the counseling is NOT treatment. If you have a cert that explicitly says it was counseling, that's great for your case. An affidavit would be much better if you appeal in a circuit court (where the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt and NO LANGUAGE I have found states that DRE etc is "treatment").

[Timothy87]

How are people finding out why they were denied? I was also denied and thy haven't put anything on my status as to why, they haven't emailed me, nor have I received the letter

[skinnyb82]

How are people finding out why they were denied? I was also denied and thy haven't put anything on my status as to why, they haven't emailed me, nor have I received the letter

 

My "denial" was a summary denial, based on a statutory disqualifier, as was IronSam's (the question at least, it's not exactly the same verbiage as what's in the law itself but good enough for the ISP). So, if you're denied because of something like...say being in alcohol treatment within the past 5 years, it will say that on the denial. If you were denied after the review board submitted its findings to the ISP, and the reason is more specific, you're gonna get a letter because of the sensitive nature of the information. When I was going back and forth trying to find out if I had some erroneous records in the DHS or HFS databases, they would not leave me a voice mail with any specific information. As for WHEN that letter will come, it seems to be the consensus that they will wait the full 90 days (if you submitted prints) or 120, then mail the formal letter of denial. Then there's emails, or lack thereof. "Key status changes" apparently does not include a denial, an approval, or any status change we've seen.

[protean]

doesn't apply to me but nice work getting that out there

 

+1

+1

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pdpsc]

An affidavit would be much better if you appeal in a circuit court (where the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

 

The standard for judicial review of an administrative decision is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard to convict someone of a criminal offense. Judicial review is more about whether procedures were followed, the decision was not arbitrary or an abuse of the administrative agency's discretion, etc...

[IronSam]

You're right on Skinny. My denial is posted on the dashboard but no other communications, yet. That's my problem and position on it as well. The law passed is quite clear regarding the "Treatment" that will disqualify. If the law disqualifies an applicant for two or more DUI's then that is renered mute by the fact that counseling is mandatory, and not up to a Judge, under state law for a first time DUI offender. The question on the applications as worded and applied undermines the very law. The Law is specific on Treatment for Alcoholism or Drugs. Neither is the case. I can't imagine this was passed by a deliberative board unless the law needs more clarification or specific wording.

Then it's One and Out.

[Dr. Rat]

I don't know much about this, but a quick look seems to indicate that for a DUI conviction the court orders either "remedial education" (for those who aren't determined to be at risk by the evaluation) or "treatment" (for those who are at risk). I didn't see anything specifically mentioning a category of "counseling" or what that might constitute. I don't know if this means anything.

[IronSam]

I copied this directly from the Illinois Law downloaded from the ISP Website.

 

Public Act 098-0063

HB0183 Enrolled LRB098 05760 MGM 35799 b

(5) 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;

 

This does not include any loose language regarding what constitutes "treatment". A first time DUI offender is required by Law, not court order, to participate in "Risk Reduction Education". If this constitutes "treatment" then even one DUI prohibits a permit while the Law cleary states "2 or more DUI's" as the prohibitor. I have a Completion Certificate for "Risk Reduction Education and Outpatient Counseling". No mention of Alchoholism as covered in the Law, which also does not include the word "Alcohol Treatment". The words "Alcohol Treatment" have been introduced on the ISP questionaire and do not conform to the letter, or spirit, of the actual Law.

 

My point being that my Denial seems set to be based on a standard that oversteps the Law. Just wondering if others are having the same problem or are being issued permits as they should.

[IronSam]

I received this response from ISP this morning regarding my Denial. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

 

 

Sir,

 

A letter will be forthcoming with instructions. We are still processing

applications and the Denied may move to Approved after a final review.

 

Thank you,

lg

[sologuy]

I received this response from ISP this morning regarding my Denial. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

 

 

Sir,

 

A letter will be forthcoming with instructions. We are still processing

applications and the Denied may move to Approved after a final review.

 

Thank you,

lg

 

How did you contact ISP? Was all of this through e-mail/what info did you include/how did you word your question or statement?

 

I'm curious since I'm in the same exact situation as you and would like the get the ball rolling if they may change your status from denied to approved.

[IronSam]

I emailed through the ISP website contact us conceal carry inquiry links on the left column. I also got my denial letter today which included a request for additional documentation.

My DUI court case is not yet closed as I am on court supervision for 3 more months, which may be the problem although the letter did not say.

They might not have been able to see the order or disposition since it's still pending the supervision period.

My compliance supervisor suggested sending copies of my Alcohol Evaluation Report and completion/compliance certificates to support the fact that I was not being treated for Alcoholism, which is the prohibitor under the Law. I hope it's sufficient. If not, I either have to wait it out for the court records or file a request for an early disposition which is up to the prosecutor. At least I think there is good end to this. Just how long is the question.

[bishopmr]

I received my first and only DUI this past November. As part of the plea deal I agreed to Alcohol risk evaluation classes level 2A which is 22 hrs of meetings. It also includes 2 years court supervision which upon completion the misdemeanor will be dismissed but the DUI will remain on my driving record. I kept my drivers license. I’ve had no other arrests/convictions. I currently possess a Florida and Pennsylvania CC permit.

 

I applied for my Illinois permit on Jan 5 and I answered no to all questions on the application. I received my denial letter today indicating I’m subject of a pending proceeding which has resulted in a disqualification to own or posses a firearm. This concerns me on several levels. First it says my DUI disqualifies me from owning a firearm. Are they going to confiscate my FOID card? Second, the date of the proceeding listed on the letter is 10/10/2013. My DUI occurred on 11/14/2013 more than a month later. As I understand the law, a single DUI is not grounds for denial. I already emailed a copy of this to Todd. Any other suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

[sologuy]

the Denied may move to Approved after a final review.

 

 

May move from Denied to Approved after a final review? That doesn't sound right.

 

Has anyone read of this final review in any other documentation that has been published before?

 

 

I received my Denied letter today, dated March 14th. Just stating what the website told me a week and a half ago. The bottom does state if I have documentation stating this information is incorrect I can send it in to ISP, but it seems I was denied by the very documentation I would be sending them(My DUI evaluation and and subsequent recommended hours of classes).

[IronSam]

I've been hard at this over the weekend and learned some since jumping into the thread. Don't panic over 1 DUI or the Treatment wording. That was my Bad, thinking they were confused. Her's what I got so far.

 

Whatever you do, don't push that "Cancel My Application Button" on the Dashboard. Being Denied doen't mean you're done, and yes it can be changed upon final review.

 

It means there's an information problem that needs to be sorted out. They are trying to determine Alcoholism.The Denial letter should instruct you on what they need to do that and make a determination acording to the written Law. I think my problem stems from being under court supervision, the case is not closed until the supervision period is satisfied. I spoke with my Compliance Officer today and you should do the same if that's your situation. They are there to help and mine did. If you took classes, "Drinker's Ed" as I did, 22hrs Moderate, you will have one or two certificates of compliance and/or completion as well as an Alcohol and Drug Evaluation Uniform Report, about 11 pages of it. Read the whole thing but look at items 9 and 10 near the end of the report for Classifications and Minimal Required Intervention. That's the stuff that will set it straight as to your status regarding Alcoholism. My Compiance officer and counselor where I took my classes both told me that Moderate is a word away from Alcoholism. I copied and sent all that with a short and polite response letter and a copy of their notification to the address they provided via ups and they will have it the next day. However you send it get a tracking number. If they still insist on the court records the only ways to go are wait out your supervision period and then obtain the court records or file with the court for an early termination, around $40 and it will be up to the prosecutor. Better yet have your lawyer file for you if it's worth the extra Money. The Lawyer may have better success talking to the Prosecutor. Try the easier road first. Hang in there~

[skinnyb82]

If you're on court supervision for a DUI and one of the terms of supervision is "no guns" then you're still subject to a pending proceeding for a crime (doesn't matter what, misdemeanor or felony) which disqualifies you from owning firearms (for the term of your supervision). If the terms of your supervision includes "no guns" and you still possess firearms, then the ASA petitions the court to revoke supervision and enter a conviction because it's a facial violation of the terms. Court supervision is deferred prosecution/adjudication in the eyes of the law because the presiding judge has not entered any judgment in the case. If you successfully complete your term of supervision, then your disposition is discharged with a final adjudication of dismissal (I'm over-simplifying it). By "successfully" I mean you abide by the law and keep your nose clean for the term of the supervision but preferably you keep your nose clean for the rest of your life. The "No" answer to "Are you subject to...pending proceeding...?" is a lie if you're still under supervision and one of the terms is that you may not own firearms for the term of your supervision.

 

The Unified Code of Corrections governs court supervision, probation, etc. Specifically 730 ILCS 5/5-6-3.1© gives the court a ton of latitude in imposing terms of supervision, such as alcohol eval, DUI Risk Education, Early Intervention, VIP, etc. which are (supposed to be but aren't really) tailored to the offense. Speaking as someone who has been there, done that, for me it was not the alcohol classes that "woke me up." It was the whole process, the shame, the costs, the fact that I could've killed someone, and the victim impact panel (which shows people the absolute worst consequence from driving while you're intoxicated, the family members' stories about their children or siblings almost brought me to tears). That being said, you had better look over the terms of your supervision because, and I'm just taking an educated guess because I recall "no guns or weapons" being part of the terms of my supervision in 2003, here is the provision in the statute which I believe is causing the ISP to commence revocation proceedings.

 

From the Unified Code of Corrections aka 730 ILCS 5/ et seq.

 

730 ILCS 5/5-6-3.1©(7)

Sec. 5-6-3.1. Incidents and Conditions of Supervision.

....

© The court may in addition to other reasonable conditions relating to the nature of the offense or the rehabilitation of the defendant as determined for each defendant in the proper discretion of the court require that the person:

....

(7) refrain from possessing a firearm or other dangerous weapon;

....

 

And from subsection (d), the portion containing deferred adjudication (making anyone who is subject to terms of supervision that includes no gun ownership a subject to a pending proceeding which disqualifies them from owning firearms if the terms of supervision include "no firearms.")

 

(d) The court shall defer entering any judgment on the charges until the conclusion of the supervision.

 

Here's a piece of advice, and I'm not trying to be arrogant or whatever (I'm the last person who has the right to be arrogant and look down my nose at anyone with one DUI) here because I have been through the whole DUI thing and I didn't really understand any of this stuff so after learning, well, a lot, here's some advice for everyone: PLEASE read any and all legal documents requiring a signature before signing them and if you have a question, ask someone (if pro se, the judge, etc) and also go ahead and read documents that don't require a signature since just because they don't require a signature doesn't mean that you're not bound by the document (if it accompanies a document you did sign, etc). Especially when pleading to a Class A misdemeanor. My advice for now would be to get an attorney because if you try to handle this on your own, even if you didn't screw up and they did, and even if you're a licensed attorney, it's a horrible idea to mount a pro se (or pro per, whatever the state decides to call it today) when your rights are on the line.