Aeighttwentysix Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:04 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:04 PM Hello everyone I’m new to this forum and I don’t know much about gun laws and I need a little help from you guys understanding the statues. I know some you are not lawyer but I would just like an opinion on the matter. So, my friend was arrested on the 24th of June at the Will County Court House because he had his gun (Glock 19), which was in a firearm case and unloaded, in his backpack (he works at a gun shop so he routinely has it in his bag). He originally went to court for a traffic violation. He has a valid FOID card and is being charged with “CARRY/POSSESS FIREARM SCHOOL” "Statute 720 5/24-1(a)(4) Class 3 Orig Felony" How can they charge him with this and the law says otherwise? According to Statute 720 5/24-1(a)(4) it says:(720 ILCS 5/24-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 24-1) Sec. 24-1. Unlawful Use of Weapons.(a) A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons when he knowingly:(4) Carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealedon or about his person except when on his land or in his own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (4) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions: (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; Why are they charging him with 720 5/24-1(a)(4) when it obviously says you are basically exempt if you have a FOID and the gun is enclosed and unloaded? Shouldn't it be a lesser charge? Does statue 430 ILCS 66/65 pertain to this? And why does it say school when it’s a court house? Am I missing something? His case is reminding me on Bruner’s case a lot. Also the Will country sherif and court site both says: Pursuant to 430ILCS 66/65(a)4, Firearms Concealed Carry Act, firearms are not permitted in any building designated for matters before a Circuit Court. And he was not “carrying" he was “transporting" right? I know I'm asking a lot of question, but I'm just curious. Thank You. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:13 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:13 PM I don't know for sure, but i don't think you can fanny pack or carry at any kind of courthouse. Kinda like trying to get thru airport security? Your friend may have screwed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patriots & Tyrants Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:14 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:14 PM Unless I am mistaken your friend might also face federal charges but here is what I could dig up state wise. c) Violations in specific places. (1) A person who violates subsection 24-1(a)(6) or 24-1(a)(7) in any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, in residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, in a public park, in a courthouse, on the real property comprising any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, on residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, on the real property comprising any public park, on the real property comprising any courthouse, in any conveyance owned, leased or contracted by a school to transport students to or from school or a school related activity, in any conveyance owned, leased, or contracted by a public transportation agency, or on any public way within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school, public park, courthouse, public transportation facility, or residential property owned, operated, or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development commits a Class 2 felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 3 years and not more than 7 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:23 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:23 PM Unless I am mistaken your friend might also face federal charges but here is what I could dig up state wise. c) Violations in specific places. (1) A person who violates subsection 24-1(a)(6) or 24-1(a)(7) in any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, in residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, in a public park, in a courthouse, on the real property comprising any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, on residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, on the real property comprising any public park, on the real property comprising any courthouse, in any conveyance owned, leased or contracted by a school to transport students to or from school or a school related activity, in any conveyance owned, leased, or contracted by a public transportation agency, or on any public way within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school, public park, courthouse, public transportation facility, or residential property owned, operated, or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development commits a Class 2 felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 3 years and not more than 7 years. 24-1(a)(6) and 24-1(a)(7) only refer to NFA items. 24-1(a)(4) is apparently what he is being charged with and the unloaded/encase exemption should apply Bringing even an unloaded/encased firearm into a courthouse is pretty stupid IMO, but AFAIK stupidity isn't illegal (yet) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeighttwentysix Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:24 PM Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:24 PM Unless I am mistaken your friend might also face federal charges but here is what I could dig up state wise. c) Violations in specific places. (1) A person who violates subsection 24-1(a)(6) or 24-1(a)(7) in any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, in residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, in a public park, in a courthouse, on the real property comprising any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, on residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, on the real property comprising any public park, on the real property comprising any courthouse, in any conveyance owned, leased or contracted by a school to transport students to or from school or a school related activity, in any conveyance owned, leased, or contracted by a public transportation agency, or on any public way within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school, public park, courthouse, public transportation facility, or residential property owned, operated, or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development commits a Class 2 felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 3 years and not more than 7 years. But that sections a-6 (possesses any device or attachment of any kind designed, used or intended for use in silencing the report of any firearm;) and a-7 (Sells, manufactures, purchases, possesses or carries: (i) a machine gun...) not section a-(4)?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeighttwentysix Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:27 PM Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:27 PM Unless I am mistaken your friend might also face federal charges but here is what I could dig up state wise. c) Violations in specific places. (1) A person who violates subsection 24-1(a)(6) or 24-1(a)(7) in any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, in residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, in a public park, in a courthouse, on the real property comprising any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, on residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, on the real property comprising any public park, on the real property comprising any courthouse, in any conveyance owned, leased or contracted by a school to transport students to or from school or a school related activity, in any conveyance owned, leased, or contracted by a public transportation agency, or on any public way within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school, public park, courthouse, public transportation facility, or residential property owned, operated, or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development commits a Class 2 felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 3 years and not more than 7 years. 24-1(a)(6) and 24-1(a)(7) only refer to NFA items. 24-1(a)(4) is apparently what he is being charged with and the unloaded/encase exemption should apply Bringing even an unloaded/encased firearm into a courthouse is pretty stupid IMO, but AFAIK stupidity isn't illegal (yet) I agree, what he did was pretty stupid but that statues say otherwise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patriots & Tyrants Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:31 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:31 PM Let me reread the whole section ; dumb question but does the Will County Courthouse have any federal offices in it? (US Marshalls, DEA, etc etc?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:34 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:34 PM I agree, what he did was pretty stupid but that statues say otherwise... I think you are mis-understanding whatever you are reading. You can't even take a pocket knife into a courthouse... And I don't think you can take a gun in, either. I think your buddy screwed up big time. He needs a good lawyer, not opinions from the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22cal Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:35 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:35 PM That was a very dumb move on his part bringing a gun whether its in a bag or whatever. Isn't to smart plus we all know that federal buildings are prohibited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeighttwentysix Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:35 PM Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:35 PM Let me reread the whole section ; dumb question but does the Will County Courthouse have any federal offices in it? (US Marshalls, DEA, etc etc?)Hmmm, not that I know of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:42 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:42 PM I know of a situation just like this in a downstate county and the charges were dismissed. Have your friend get a good attorney. You might have him check with the ISRA for an attorney referral 815 635-3198 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patriots & Tyrants Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:48 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:48 PM All else being equal I accidentally had a swiss army knife in my pocket the last time I went to the FAA building in Aurora years back. The one guard on duty asked me to take it out to my truck, did the metal wand thing on me again, told me I could proceed inside..with my truck Federal buildings and property are a whole other level of confusion. Looking at Google Maps I see some federal stuff in that area but its unclear if the Will County Courthouse shares any offices with federal agencies. Have your friend do what Molly says , she knows best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockman Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:59 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 07:59 PM UUW is not sustainable (insert good attorney here). If a sign was clearly posted stating no weapons, the criminal trespass is what is normally charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerze2387 Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:15 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:15 PM Id say this would be a good test case for the FOID transport discussion, except the fact it was a COURTHOUSE. Government buildings and airports are the 2 WORST places to try that. I had jury duty about 2 weeks ago at the Maywood courthouse, and had to go back to my car because i almost tried to go in with my pocket knife. Id have to agree and say that was not the smartest decision at all, and wouldnt even say they were wrong if the charges stick. its a COURTHOUSE, they have VERY good reasons for not allowing firearms under any circumstances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2A4Cook Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:30 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:30 PM Id say this would be a good test case for the FOID transport discussion, except the fact it was a COURTHOUSE. Government buildings and airports are the 2 WORST places to try that. I had jury duty about 2 weeks ago at the Maywood courthouse, and had to go back to my car because i almost tried to go in with my pocket knife. Id have to agree and say that was not the smartest decision at all, and wouldnt even say they were wrong if the charges stick. its a COURTHOUSE, they have VERY good reasons for not allowing firearms under any circumstancesThat very good reason would be named, "Hutchie Moore." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmer Fudd Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:35 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:35 PM That story is just gruesome... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:46 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:46 PM Id say this would be a good test case for the FOID transport discussion, except the fact it was a COURTHOUSE. Government buildings and airports are the 2 WORST places to try that.Assuming this is not a federal violation, I'd say this is the perfect test case. In terms of the FCCA, a courthouse is the same as a playground, park, hospital, etc... In other words, a prohibited location is a prohibited location. ETA: does your friend have a concealed carry license? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:53 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 08:53 PM There is already case law on this isn't there? People v Bruner ? http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/1996/4thDistrict/December/HTML/4951016.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted June 28, 2014 at 09:06 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 09:06 PM There is already case law on this isn't there? People v Bruner ? http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/1996/4thDistrict/December/HTML/4951016.txt Circumstances are identical, or identical as far as I can tell. Compliance with transport, but went into the courthouse. I'm not familiar with IL procedure, nor would I ever consider handling this myself, but if I were an attorney (and I am not heh) then I would file a simple motion to dismiss citing Bruner. Macon County and Will County, not the same and I'm pretty sure that one District's appellate court decisions are not binding on other Districts but guiding precedent. Either way, if they want to push the issue they could end up on the end of a juicy federal lawsuit in which the County would (educated guess based on facts provided) almost certainly not prevail, likely not even make it to trial but the clock starts ticking on claims the second a person's civil liberties have been infringed upon. While it is incredibly stupid to bring a cased, unloaded firearm in compliance with the FOID Act into a county courthouse, it is obviously not illegal. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted June 28, 2014 at 09:19 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 09:19 PM it is obviously not illegal. Not a violation of Illinois UUW. Too bad he didn't have a CCL and get charged with violating the Illinois Firearms Concealed Carry Act - that would have been an interesting test case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt555gs Posted June 28, 2014 at 09:39 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 09:39 PM Interesting. Worth following. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeighttwentysix Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:01 PM Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:01 PM Id say this would be a good test case for the FOID transport discussion, except the fact it was a COURTHOUSE. Government buildings and airports are the 2 WORST places to try that.Assuming this is not a federal violation, I'd say this is the perfect test case. In terms of the FCCA, a courthouse is the same as a playground, park, hospital, etc... In other words, a prohibited location is a prohibited location. ETA: does your friend have a concealed carry license? No, he doesn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:11 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:11 PM In terms of the FCCA, a courthouse is the same as a playground, park, hospital, etc... In other words, a prohibited location is a prohibited location. He isn't being charged under (430 ILCS 66/65) - the FCCA, he wasn't carrying. He is being charged with UUW under (720 ILCS 5/24-1). It sounds like what they are charging him with specifically is: (2) A person who violates subsection 24-1(a)(1), 24-1(a)(2), or 24-1(a)(3) in any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, in residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, in a public park, in a courthouse, on the real property comprising any school, regardless of the time of day or the time of year, on residential property owned, operated or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development, on the real property comprising any public park, on the real property comprising any courthouse, in any conveyance owned, leased or contracted by a school to transport students to or from school or a school related activity, in any conveyance owned, leased, or contracted by a public transportation agency, or on any public way within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school, public park, courthouse, public transportation facility, or residential property owned, operated, or managed by a public housing agency or leased by a public housing agency as part of a scattered site or mixed-income development commits a Class 4 felony. "Courthouse" means any building that is used by the Circuit, Appellate, or Supreme Court of this State for the conduct of official business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:13 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:13 PM I think this is Bruner all over again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt555gs Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:19 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:19 PM And Winbigler vs Warren County Public Housing guttered all references to public housing or scattered site public housing. Not that it matters in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt555gs Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:20 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:20 PM · Hidden by Lou, June 29, 2014 at 12:19 AM - No reason given Hidden by Lou, June 29, 2014 at 12:19 AM - No reason given Bruner II. Link to comment
RacerDave6 Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:26 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:26 PM Get good counsel.Have him or her make a phone call to the SA.Glasgow most likely will drop the UUW. You still might get with a 'I was stupid' charge, but it's better then the UUW.The SA has appeared at more then on Will Co ISRA meeting and said if anyone had any 'gun charge' type problems, providing there were no other circumstances, to call him and he would try to work it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeighttwentysix Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:29 PM Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 10:29 PM Get good counsel.Have him or her make a phone call to the SA.Glasgow most likely will drop the UUW. You still might get with a 'I was stupid' charge, but it's better then the UUW.The SA has appeared at more then on Will Co ISRA meeting and said if anyone had any 'gun charge' type problems, providing there were no other circumstances, to call him and he would try to work it out. I know of a situation just like this in a downstate county and the charges were dismissed. Have your friend get a good attorney. You might have him check with the ISRA for an attorney referral 815 635-3198 I'll most definitely let him know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tchostler Posted June 28, 2014 at 11:50 PM Share Posted June 28, 2014 at 11:50 PM Sorry to hear about anyone, without malicious intent, in trouble. We will hear more of this I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G214me Posted June 29, 2014 at 12:29 AM Share Posted June 29, 2014 at 12:29 AM PLEASE keep us updated on what happens with your buddy, we would love to know what his lawyer says as well as the SA. Good luck and I hope this gets dismissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.