Appealing CCL Review Board Denial

[Soul2013]

This was posted on the Illinois State Police Website the past couple of days ago. It was made in reference to a weapons case that they made an arrest in.

 

 

"The Public is reminded that all persons are presumed innocent until the charges are proven in a court of law."

 

 

What happened to all of us?

[Sysco70]

Ok so I had talked to the AAG last week and she told me that I did not need to attend my court date on 8/13 if I agree to the remand but if I did not agree then I should show up and she happen to be submitting the motion as we spoke. Well when I recieved the motion she entered two days later she wrote it as if we had already agreed to that and that was not the case ! What the hey!!! !

[Dfens]

My filing in opposition to remand

[Sysco70]

I also wanted that option but she did not give it to me. So I've now hired an attorney I'm done with there lying and there games.

[cnwfan3]

Sysco70, good for you! Once you secure council, hopefully they will stop playing games with you! Unfortunately, it seems that most of these will require council to get these denials cleaned up. It's really sad as it is costing us a bunch of money for something that was unjust and should have never happened in the first place!

[Sysco70]

I agree and your atty seems like he knows what's up and how to handle this I feel much better now that I have an attorney. I will prevail my freedom and my Right to keep and Bear arms shall not and will not be infringed upon ! " from my cold dead hands as my true and only president (charleston Heston ) said. There is no price I will not pay god bless us all.

[jjbook79]

I accepted a remand, went on the site and uploaded my agreed order, got the usual error but it appears to still have been submitted. It has been a few days since I checked the site and I am now status Appeal Under Review. I have already started drafting my response when they again deny me due to an arrest that resulted in no charges filed from 13 years ago. It was a domestic arrest, no evidence to support it so no charges were filed. I expect the board to again deny me and give me the ridiculous 10 days to respond. Then I will at least have my side on the record if they further deny me and I go before the judge.

[Ssrkid86]

jjbook79, did your status change before or after you submitted the remand agreement?

[cnwfan3]

I agree and your atty seems like he knows what's up and how to handle this I feel much better now that I have an attorney. I will prevail my freedom and my Right to keep and Bear arms shall not and will not be infringed upon ! " from my cold dead hands as my true and only president (charleston Heston ) said. There is no price I will not pay god bless us all.

 

Yes, they are very good. They won my appeal for me so I am fairly confident they will be able to take care of you. I already uploaded the court order telling them to issue my CCL, now I'm just waiting. I've already waited 7 months so I suppose a few more weeks won't kill me.

[Elmer Fudd]

My filing in opposition to remand

Very well done! Good luck

[Sysco70]

I already got an update today. I shall prevail :-)

[Ssrkid86]

I already got an update today. I shall prevail :-)

 

Can you share what the update was?

[Sysco70]

I retained an attorney on tues. Read my earlier post on what the AAG did with trying to remand me and I did not agree to a remand so I said to myself I'm done with there bull crap and retained an attorney. The update was from my attorney telling me my original court date was on 8/13 now moved to 8/26 he got in contact with the AAG and had them change there motion to reman me I opted to not get remanded.

[Ssrkid86]

Ah OK. I thought the update was something more assuring to your future victory.

[Dfens]

 

My filing in opposition to remand

Very well done! Good luck

 

 

Thank you very much. I hope to have my way. I am inclined that to believe, however, that the judge will play it safe and punt.

[Dfens]

So this morning I received a notice of hearing that would move up consideration of the AG's motion to remand. Of course, I'd rather move things sooner than later so ordinarily this would be a good thing.

 

Trouble is,

 

I wasn't consulted regards the scheduling at all.

I am previously engaged on that date and therefore cannot attend

The notice provided fails to comply with local rules because it provides insufficient notice.

 

And so it goes when dealing with the AG...

[jasong145]

Had my court date yesterday. judge said the application was remanded. i have a status hearing court date nov 6th. i looked on the state website and my application still says denied, and not under board review as i thought it would.

For those people whose application went back to the board, how long did it take after your court date for your status to be under board review again?

[Ssrkid86]

Had my court date yesterday. judge said the application was remanded. i have a status hearing court date nov 6th. i looked on the state website and my application still says denied, and not under board review as i thought it would.

For those people whose application went back to the board, how long did it take after your court date for your status to be under board review again?

 

Jason, I was about to ask this question today. If you don't mind, I'd like to remain in contact about the events that take place in your case. My remand hearing is Monday. I have agreed to the remand and am not attending this hearing so wouldn't mind seeing how others have gone down since most of this seems to be following suit.

I know if you submit a court order on the ISP website, the status will automatically change to something like, 'appeal under review'. Perhaps MollyB can let us know if we are supposed to submit the Remand notice to the ISP so our status can change to 'under board review' or something to that affect.

[Sysco70]

Jason, sskid did you guys agree to a remand ? Or did they just do it on there own ? And if you did why did you agree ?

[Dfens]

Jason, sskid did you guys agree to a remand ? Or did they just do it on there own ? And if you did why did you agree ?

 

 

IMO, the best reason to agree to a remand is the substantial likelihood that in most cases the judge will order a remand over objection.

 

This issue is a hot potato, and a messy one at that. I don't believe there is any recourse in the context of an administrative review hearing if the judge kicks it back. Just maybe the case goes away (e.g., applicant misses yet another deadline or maybe the CCLRB reverses itself) upon remand and the judge gets off the hook entirely. Remand is the safest decision a judge can make. A ruling on the complaint stands a pretty decent chance of generating an appeal regardless of the decision, something that few judges want. I happen to think that for most of us, effective remand is statutorily prohibited but it's not as if the improper remand can be taken to the appeals court while the matter is still pending.

 

I got my scheduling issue sorted. The AAG advised that in the event that the motion to remand is denied, he will ask for additional time to brief the matter - again. My guess is that my case will be remanded despite my lengthy protestations and will still be pending until April or so before I get a resolution.

[Ssrkid86]

Jason, sskid did you guys agree to a remand ? Or did they just do it on there own ? And if you did why did you agree ?

I agreed to the remand. Like Dfens stated above, I agree that the judges will most likely have the cases remanded anyways (Aside from those with mistaken identity)

 

The other reasoning I used, there's really no downside other than loss of opportunity to stick it to the man. I can now present evidence IF necessary AFTER given what looks like a FAIR(er) hearing with the CCLRB than last time. Even if we are again denied, our appeals continue exactly where they left off. At least this time, the evidence I supplied to the CCLRB is admissible. The upside would essentially be that the CCLRB realizes their errors and grant those of us wrongfully denied our permits. It's unfortunate that we all spent hundreds or even thousands of dollars on the appeals process but I think some would agree that at this point we've considered that money lost and just want our f'n permits!

 

edit: I hope the continued media coverage we are receiving has shed light to those taking advantage of the system that we will not go quietly into the night and will never stop fighting for our rights. Hopefully this helps keep the ISP and CCLRB on the right path. Along with the hard work of Illinois Carry, ISRA, NRA, and other organizations helping with the cause.

[Sysco70]

So both you are going pro se I take it ? And I take it your cases are not mistaken id. Can I ask then why you were denied? I have arrests but no convictions? And decided on not to get remanded because what other proof could I submit other than what they already have.

[Ssrkid86]

I am pro se and depending heavily on other members of this boards assistance for information as well as hours of my own research whenever necessary.

I was denied because I was under investigation for a wellness check. (I can't recall exactly how it was worded) Which occurred in 2011. At the time of my denial I had never been arrested, never been convicted, never seen the back of a squad car, and never been to court for anything other than speeding tickets. (Nothing more than court supervision) (This was prior to 2008)

[Ssrkid86]

I am curious how the arrested but never convicted cases turn out. 10 days or so ago I was arrested for criminal damage to property. (House sitting at my uncle's and a someone allegedly shot a hole in a neighbors fence with a bb gun. ) I had my friends leave before the neighbor called the police. I refused to admit guilt. Arrested and charged. First court date for that is September. Attorney for this was incredibly cheap and is 100% certain it will either be thrown out or at a minimum expunged from my record if found guilty. Waiting to see what the neighbor claims to have on camera of us doing.

The sucky part is that a bb gun can be considered a firearm by most laws. So I made it very clear that no matter how this has to play out, I CANNOT have such a stupid charge affect all of my efforts/time/money I have tied into my CC permit.

[Sysco70]

Both sound beatable but again what evidence on your part are you going to submit for the well being check ?

[Ssrkid86]

I honestly do not know yet.

In best case scenario I'm hoping none of us need to present any evidence since our reasons for denials are not disqualifiers for a SHALL issue permit.

I'm hoping someone else is asked to provide 'evidence' to defend their record and can point us all in the right direction. If not, I will talk to others in similar situations and members of this forum to help me present evidence on my behalf.

 

For me individually I'd submit my FOID card along with a dated document showing it is valid as well as my Utah and Florida permits. Followed by my non existent criminal history report provided by the ISP.

 

The reality behind the well being check is that a friend of an ex gf called the local pd and claimed I had a firearm and was threatening suicide. No actual evidence of the incident exists other than a wild accusation by someone who was not at my residence. (Nor was my gf at the time) Police arrived, spoke with me, my firearm was locked in my safe (where I always kept it at the time), they never asked to see it. Simply spoke for 5 minutes and left.

This is essentially no different if I just started picking names out of a phone book and called their local police department and said they had a gun and threatened to commit suicide. There's no substantial evidence that I'm being rational or truthful.

[Sysco70]

Hope for the best but prepare for the worst good luck gentlemen. I ended up retaining an attorney good luck to us all.

[AJR]

I am curious how the arrested but never convicted cases turn out. 10 days or so ago I was arrested for criminal damage to property. (House sitting at my uncle's and a someone allegedly shot a hole in a neighbors fence with a bb gun. ) I had my friends leave before the neighbor called the police. I refused to admit guilt. Arrested and charged. First court date for that is September. Attorney for this was incredibly cheap and is 100% certain it will either be thrown out or at a minimum expunged from my record if found guilty. Waiting to see what the neighbor claims to have on camera of us doing.

The sucky part is that a bb gun can be considered a firearm by most laws. So I made it very clear that no matter how this has to play out, I CANNOT have such a stupid charge affect all of my efforts/time/money I have tied into my CC permit.

You should write a letter to your neighbor and ask for a copy of the video. Let him know you did not shoot a hole in his fence, but if the video shows your friends did, you will ask your friends to pay for damages. He just has to drop the case against you.

[Dfens]

Argh, I just wrote a book on this and miskeyed and lost it all. I have some critical thoughts on a number of posts on the last page

 

A couple standout points, though:

 

1) The new rules do not entitle anyone to any hearing

2) Send your FOID FWIW but it's a prerequisite to a CCL. You wouldn't have made it to the CCLRB if you didn't have one and the CCLRB should know that.

 

Ssr, your situation is vaguely similar to mine. I wrote several paragraphs that I think might be enlightening for those who have not combed through this matter but I have fumblefingers and managed to back out of this thread and lose the voluminous post that I had written. When I get another minute, I'll be back to expand.

 

In the meantime...

 

Is anyone confident that if the CCLRB sustains the rejection on remand that they will actually get relief in the courts? The current contention is that nominal emergency rule changes made subsequent to final decisions on the case justify a remand. So, why can't the agency perpetually keep cases from judicial review using the same tactic repeatedly?

 

$100 to the first person that can cite me to a reported case where the court held that a subsequent rule change justified a remand.

[Dfens]

Why should anyone imagine that, except in cases of mistaken identity and other blatant mistakes by the CCLRB, a remand will produce a different result? The objection will remain the same. This is a CCLRB that previously looked at any given objection and decided that it should sustain it without any further inquiry whatsoever. It isn’t as if the CCLRB had a backlog of reviews (as it will now). It isn’t as if the CCLRB was powerless to investigate. It didn’t bother because it had seen all it felt was necessary. Case closed. Why would the CCLRB be interested in evidence now? Although the small window in which to submit evidence does offer, at last, a minimal opportunity to submit evidence and make a record, who really thinks that this change is designed to be more fair? IMO, it is designed to do nothing more than to lessen the obviousness of the mockery the scheme makes of due process. The ISP views this small procedural change as important in defending its position if/when these cases start to finally get addressed by an appeals court.

As to the ‘evidence’ upon remand, it’s pretty likely that the evidence is going to need to be documentary in nature but these awesomely drafted rules don’t make that explicit. I suppose you could submit multimedia evidence but that is potentially risky because there’s no telling what might be made of such material by the almighty CCLRB. I don’t think any of the major carriers will agree to send a human parcel post. Presenting testimony is the sort of thing that you might do at a hearing which you are emphatically not entitled to under the rules. If I get remanded, I will draft an affidavit and secure rafts of affidavits from law enforcement and other creditable individuals regarding my character and the basis of the objection. A notarized affidavit is as close to testimony as one could reasonably get by way of submission, I would think. I will also submit my FL CCL and some other miscellaneous evidence supportive of my fitness, stability and good moral character.

Of course, with regard to evidence on remand, that is a potential landmine in and of itself. As I pointed out in my motion opposing remand posted in this thread, a statute prohibits remand to an administrative agency to consider evidence other than newly discovered evidence. None of the evidence that I would submit in my case is newly discovered evidence. I expect that is likely true of all CCLRB rejected applicants. Maybe you submit your evidence and the CCLRB refuses to accept it because it is not newly discovered evidence in that it could have been obtained with the exercise of due diligence. Because it cannot properly be considered, it should not be expected to make it to the record. Then you are potentially dead in the water at the circuit court without any hope of an appeal without a record. The court doesn’t have the power to order an agency to violate the statute and no promise by the ISP’s representative that the CCLRB will accept anything other than newly discovered evidence, is enforceable. I’d rather risk wasting another month’s delay fighting the AG’s litigation tactics, something I predicted, generally, earlier in this thread. Why Illinois couldn’t just plagiarize a functional CCL scheme and tweak it for fit, I can’t imagine. I guess it could be worse and I could live in New Jersey.

The JCAR is meeting again to consider additional procedural rules August 12, 2014. NEWS ITEM Which rules apply to whom, anyway? Will the rules change again? In my favor or against? Does every rule change justify a remand of an already decided matter? Sure, if you hate certainty, consistency and efficiency . If not every change merits a remand, what makes this one different? The additional process is a farce and perhaps effectively foreclosed by statute anyway.

Assuming (big assumption) no additional rule changes, can the CCLRB even get through its case load by the time the emergency rules expire December 7, 2014? The July 10, 2014 notice of emergency amendments claims that there were in excess of 200 administrative review actions pending. If the ISP has its way, they will all be before the CCLRB on remand, in addition to the normal caseload. So we should believe that a heavier workload with a greater volume of materials to be considered on a deadline will result in more careful, thoughtful and accurate assessments? Is this a joke? Where is the camera hiding?