NJ Carry: Drake v. Filko (Muller v. Maenz)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The opening brief for Piszczatoski (was Muller v. Maenza) was filed today.

There are 127 pages, including the appendix. The body of the brief begins on pp 17 and ends on pp 73, of the PDF. That's 54 pages (for those that are counting).

I'll have more to say, when I get a chance to read and digest the brief. At first glance, it seems to be much like the final reply brief in Kachalsky.
 

Attachments

I'm really hoping we can some wins here in NJ that actually effect a law change, but man it's hard to be optimistic in the state.
 
Having read the opening brief, I'm of the opinion that we are finally seeing what Alan Gura has been working up to.

If you were to read the opening brief and the reply brief in the Kachalsky (2nd Circuit) case, and then contrast those with this brief, you will see that all the points are made and highlighted.

This point is more apparent in the opening brief in Moore v. Madigan (7th Circuit).

I believe we will see much the same in the responding brief in the Woollard case (4th Circuit), when the final stages of dealing with the Stay is dealt with by Judge Legg. Note: We won in Woollard and MD has already filed for appeal. They will get first and last say in the briefing. Gura will only get a response.

What we are seeing is the same basic argument in three States (and three different circuit courts of appeal) that deny the right to carry, and hence the right to self defense. They will either create a circuit split, encouraging the Supreme Court to grant Cert or they will all agree with Gura and create a persuasive precedent the other circuits cannot avoid (are you listening 9th Circuit?).
 
Piszczatoski v. Maenz (New Jersey, 3rd Circuit).

Another 30 day extension granted for New Jersey to respond to the appeal.

05/21/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: Motion filed by Appellees Attorney General New Jersey, Rudolph A. Filko, Edward A. Jerejian, Thomas V. Manahan, Esq. and Superintendent New Jersey State Police for Extension of Time to file Brief until/for 30 days. Certificate of Service dated 05/21/2012. (DI)

05/21/2012 Open Document ORDER (Clerk) granting Motion for extension of time to file brief by Appellees Attorney General New Jersey, Superintendent New Jersey State Police, Rudolph A. Filko, Edward A. Jerejian and Thomas V. Manahan, Esq. until June 28, 2012, filed. (TMK)[/quot]
Click to expand...
 
Is New Jersey essentially saying "We acknowledge that we have no case but please help us string out the status quo for as long as possible"?
 
Last edited:
I thought we had anti judges here in Illinois, at least the judges here occasionally make the state get around to what the lawsuit is all about instead of stringing out the process for as long as possible.
 
In response to Standing Wolf comment on the spam filter block.

When dealing with hostile legislators, i always send my comments the old fashioned way. I use paper, an envelope and a stamp.

It is easy to ignore an e-mail. Just hit the delete button. Occupying the staff's time with a heavy volume of paper will get their attention a lot quicker than spurious electrons.
 
Is New Jersey essentially saying "We acknowledge that we have no case but please help us string out the status quo for as long as possible"?
Click to expand...
Without seeing the extension motions, I wouldn't read too much into a motion for an extension at the appellate level. Government lawyers who practice in the appellate courts have no way to control their workload. The only recourse is to reschedule some briefs. Most appellate courts will be somewhat lenient on this except in unusual circumstances.
 
Here we go again (or still). From the Table of Contents (I haven't even gotten to ther meat yet: "Heller Only Recognized a Right to Bear Arms for Self-Defense in the Home."

Applicants for a permit to carry a handgun must demonstrate that they: (1) are not disqualified by a disability enumerated in N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:58-3(c), (2) are thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns, and (3) have a “justifiable need” to carry a handgun. N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:58-4c. The justifiable need requirement must be considered on a case-by-case basis. In re Borinsky, 830 A.2d 507, 516 (N.J. Super. Ct. App Div. 2003). Justifiable need means the “urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.” N.J. Admin. Code § 13:54-2.4(d)(1) (2012); see also In re Preis, 573 A.2d at 152 (citing Siccardi v. State, 284 A.2d 533, 540 (N.J. 1971)).
Click to expand...
Which lawyer was it in which case who made the point that the 2nd Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs?

The attorneys for the state are arguing that "reasonable regulation" means preventing 95 percent of the population from being "allowed" to exercise a right that the Constitution guarantees. Many other states have determined that "regulation" means the state can impose certain restrictions on the mode of carry, but cannot deprive the individual of the exercise of the right in its entirety. But that's what NJ does.

Longstanding regulatory measures like New Jersey’s are presumptively lawful and outside the scope of the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

I don't think so.
 
The reply brief is in.

I haven't read much of it yet (been reading the Woollard response), but it is a bit drier reading. I believe David Jensen is the author of this one.

I'll have a better commentary on it, tomorrow.

AAR, this will conclude the briefing schedule at CA3. The orals date will be announced in a few weeks,
 

Attachments

After 2 months and with nothing forthcoming from the CA3, Alan Gura states his reasons for an Oral Argument and essentially, requests a date.

10/02/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: Request by Appellants Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs Inc, John M. Drake, Finley Fenton, Gregory C. Gallaher, Daniel J. Piszczatoski, Lenny S. Salerno and Second Amendment Foundation Inc for Oral Argument. [SEND TO MERITS] (DDJ)
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

11/02/2012 Open Document Calendared for Tuesday, 02/12/2013. (TLW)

11/05/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE from Alan Gura on behalf of Appellant(s) Daniel Pisczcatoski, John Drake, Gregory Gallaher, Lenny Salerno, Finley Fenton, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Inc.. (AG)

11/05/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: ARGUMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT filed by Attorney Mary E. Wood, Esq. for Appellees Rudolph A. Filko, Attorney General New Jersey, Superintendent New Jersey State Police, Edward A. Jerejian and Thomas V. Manahan, Esq.. Certificate of Service dated 11/05/2012. (MEW)

11/06/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: ARGUMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT filed by Attorney Alan Gura, Esq. for Appellants Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs Inc, Daniel J. Piszczatoski, John M. Drake, Gregory C. Gallaher, Lenny S. Salerno, Finley Fenton and Second Amendment Foundation Inc. Certificate of Service dated 11/06/2012. (AG)

11/07/2012 Open Document ECF FILER: Certificate of Service filed by Attorney Mary E. Wood, Esq. for Appellees Rudolph A. Filko, Attorney General New Jersey, Superintendent New Jersey State Police, Edward A. Jerejian and Thomas V. Manahan, Esq. Certificate of Service dated 11/05/2012.--[Edited 11/14/2012 by TLW] (MEW)
Click to expand...

The above means that a hearing for orals determination are tentatively scheduled for 02-11-2013. Unless... The panel decides no orals are needed, in which case the parties will be notified at least one week prior to the date of the argument.

What I think we are seeing here, is the CA3 milking this in order to see what the 7th, the 2nd, and the 4th circuits will do.
 

Attachments

If CCW becomes reality for the average person in NJ, then there will be one reason to reside within it's boarders... One reason only :)
 
Dead said:
If CCW becomes reality for the average person in NJ, then there will be one reason to reside within it's boarders... One reason only :)
Click to expand...

If CCW becomes reality for the average person in NJ, pigs will surely be flying. :D
 
Everyone seems to think of Bayonne or Newark...

NJ has some nice areas. Warren County up north is actually pretty and rural.

New Brunswick area isn't bad.

Princeton area is quite nice.

I have family in NJ; I prefer when they visit me, due to the stupid gun laws up there, and I don't particularly wish to live up that way, but it has some nice features.
 
South jersey is very nice as well and extremely rural. I live in cape may.

Its a shame we all have to suffer the stupidity of the suburban and city area's...an even bigger shame that the federal goverment has no real interest in enforcing the constitution.

I sure do hope this case makes it somwhere...but of course I'm not holding my breath. Freedom is just a little too much to ask for...in some parts of the country anyway. Most likely we will be forced to continue to walk the streets at the mercy of criminals until SCOTUS gets involved... Even then i'm sure NJ will drag its feet whenever possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top