http://www.geocities.com/rkba2da/vcdl20071011.pdf
VA-ALERT: Newport News judge gets CCW grammar lesson
-----Original Message-----
From: VCDL President
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: VA-ALERT: VCDL victory for military in NN!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's Gun Dealer Legal Defense Fund -- help fight Mayor Bloomberg's scheme to cripple Virginia firearms dealers. See: www.vcdl.org/index.html#DefenseFund
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You may recall that Judge Pugh of the Newport News Circuit Court was not issuing CHPs to members of the military stationed in Newport News unless they met with him personally and offered proof that they planned on staying in Virginia when their term in the military was over.
That was illegal and unfair to our men and women who serve so selflessly in the military.
I had contacted Judge Pugh's office and explained that Virginia law said permits were to be issued to military members whether that was their permanent home or they were just stationed there temporarily.
No effect.
Even though the Newport News City Council had no influence over the problem, VCDL members let them know about it back in November of 2006, hoping that City Council might talk to Judge Pugh.
Nothing.
VCDL then decided that it would foot the bill to have a member of the military take the matter before the Virginia Court of Appeals. We just needed the member of the military to say 'no' to Judge Pugh's demands and to let the Judge deny the application.
That person, Christopher Deteresa, who is a Military Police officer nonetheless, stepped up to the plate and was turned down for his permit in May of 2007.
VCDL then turned his case over to attorney Richard Gardiner to appeal.
VICTORY!
The Court of Appeals, after giving the Judge some basic English lessons (I can just picture the Court of Appeals rolling its collective eyes), ordered Judge Pugh to cease denying permits to the military stationed in his jurisdiction solely because they are not permanent residents!
Judge Pugh could have easily avoided this embarrassment, but wouldn't listen to reason. Oh, well.
This ruling will apply to the entire state, so if there are any other judges who decide to play such games with our military, we now have the tool to stop such abuse.
VCDL would like to thank CPT Deteresa, who is currently deployed, for not only fighting for his country, but also fighting for the rights of his military comrades. He could have caved-in to Judge Pugh to get his permit, but he refused so as to put an end to Judge Pugh's foolishness.
Here is a link to the ruling:
http://www.vcdl.org/pdf/AppealsNN.pdf
VIRGINIA: In the Court of Appeals of Virginia on
Wednesday, 3rd October, 2007.
In Re: Concealed Weapon Application of Christopher Matthew Deteresa Record No. 1909-07-1 Circuit Court No. 16633-DP From the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News Per Curiam
By order dated May 22, 2007, the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News denied petitioner's second application pursuant to Code §
18.2-308(D) for a permit to carry a concealed handgun, having been previously denied a permit by order entered May 30, 2005, on the ground that he is not a domiciliary of Newport News.
Code § 18.2-308(D) provides in pertinent part as follows:
Any person 21 years of age or older may apply in writing to the clerk of the circuit court of the county or city in which he resides, or if he is a member of the United States Armed Forces, the county or city in which he is domiciled, for a five-year permit to carry a concealed handgun. There shall be no requirement regarding the length of time an applicant has been a resident or domiciliary of the county or city.
The circuit court heard testimony ore tenus, and found as follows in denying petitioner's application for a permit: [Petitioner's] temporary, transit and actual place of residence is the City of Newport News. He is a temporary resident solely due to military status and orders. The evidence presented this date does not show that Newport News is his permanent residence or is his true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, to which whenever he is absent he had the intention of returning.
Petitioner argues that the statute does not require a member of the United States Armed Forces to be a domiciliary of a jurisdiction to be eligible for a permit. Rather, the plain language of the statute provides that an applicant who is a member of the United States Armed Forces may be either a domiciliary, or, alternatively, a resident. We agree.
Generally, phrases separated by a comma and the disjunctive "or," are independent. See,~, Ruben v. Secretary of DHHS, 22 Cl. Ct. 264, 266
(1991) (finding that, the word "or" connects two parts of a sentence, '''but disconnect their meaning'"(quoting G. Curme, A Grammar of the English Language, Syntax 166 (1986»)); Quindlen v. Prudential Ins. Co., 482 F.2d 876, 878 (5th Cir. 1973) (noting disjunctive results in alternatives, which must be treated separately) .... Smoot v. Commonwealth, 37 Va. App. 495, 501,559 S.E.2d 409,412 (2002).
The phrase in Code § 18.2-308(D) allowing "any person" to apply for a permit in the county or city in which he resides and the phrase allowing "a member of the United States Armed Forces" to apply for a permit in the county or city in which he is domiciled are separated by a comma and the disjunctive "or." Thus, that language plainly indicates that if the applicant is a member of the United States Armed Forces, in addition to his right, as with any other person, to apply to the circuit court where he resides, he may alternatively apply for a permit to the circuit court where he is domiciled.
Accordingly, based on the circuit court's finding that petitioner is a resident of the City of Newport News, he is eligible to apply for a permit in that jurisdiction. The order appealed from is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News for entry of further orders consistent with this order.
-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.
VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org
http://www.geocities.com/rkba2da/vcdl20071011.pdf
VA-ALERT: Newport News judge gets CCW grammar lesson
-----Original Message-----
From: VCDL President
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: VA-ALERT: VCDL victory for military in NN!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's Gun Dealer Legal Defense Fund -- help fight Mayor Bloomberg's scheme to cripple Virginia firearms dealers. See: www.vcdl.org/index.html#DefenseFund
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You may recall that Judge Pugh of the Newport News Circuit Court was not issuing CHPs to members of the military stationed in Newport News unless they met with him personally and offered proof that they planned on staying in Virginia when their term in the military was over.
That was illegal and unfair to our men and women who serve so selflessly in the military.
I had contacted Judge Pugh's office and explained that Virginia law said permits were to be issued to military members whether that was their permanent home or they were just stationed there temporarily.
No effect.
Even though the Newport News City Council had no influence over the problem, VCDL members let them know about it back in November of 2006, hoping that City Council might talk to Judge Pugh.
Nothing.
VCDL then decided that it would foot the bill to have a member of the military take the matter before the Virginia Court of Appeals. We just needed the member of the military to say 'no' to Judge Pugh's demands and to let the Judge deny the application.
That person, Christopher Deteresa, who is a Military Police officer nonetheless, stepped up to the plate and was turned down for his permit in May of 2007.
VCDL then turned his case over to attorney Richard Gardiner to appeal.
VICTORY!
The Court of Appeals, after giving the Judge some basic English lessons (I can just picture the Court of Appeals rolling its collective eyes), ordered Judge Pugh to cease denying permits to the military stationed in his jurisdiction solely because they are not permanent residents!
Judge Pugh could have easily avoided this embarrassment, but wouldn't listen to reason. Oh, well.
This ruling will apply to the entire state, so if there are any other judges who decide to play such games with our military, we now have the tool to stop such abuse.
VCDL would like to thank CPT Deteresa, who is currently deployed, for not only fighting for his country, but also fighting for the rights of his military comrades. He could have caved-in to Judge Pugh to get his permit, but he refused so as to put an end to Judge Pugh's foolishness.
Here is a link to the ruling:
http://www.vcdl.org/pdf/AppealsNN.pdf
VIRGINIA: In the Court of Appeals of Virginia on
Wednesday, 3rd October, 2007.
In Re: Concealed Weapon Application of Christopher Matthew Deteresa Record No. 1909-07-1 Circuit Court No. 16633-DP From the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News Per Curiam
By order dated May 22, 2007, the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News denied petitioner's second application pursuant to Code §
18.2-308(D) for a permit to carry a concealed handgun, having been previously denied a permit by order entered May 30, 2005, on the ground that he is not a domiciliary of Newport News.
Code § 18.2-308(D) provides in pertinent part as follows:
Any person 21 years of age or older may apply in writing to the clerk of the circuit court of the county or city in which he resides, or if he is a member of the United States Armed Forces, the county or city in which he is domiciled, for a five-year permit to carry a concealed handgun. There shall be no requirement regarding the length of time an applicant has been a resident or domiciliary of the county or city.
The circuit court heard testimony ore tenus, and found as follows in denying petitioner's application for a permit: [Petitioner's] temporary, transit and actual place of residence is the City of Newport News. He is a temporary resident solely due to military status and orders. The evidence presented this date does not show that Newport News is his permanent residence or is his true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, to which whenever he is absent he had the intention of returning.
Petitioner argues that the statute does not require a member of the United States Armed Forces to be a domiciliary of a jurisdiction to be eligible for a permit. Rather, the plain language of the statute provides that an applicant who is a member of the United States Armed Forces may be either a domiciliary, or, alternatively, a resident. We agree.
Generally, phrases separated by a comma and the disjunctive "or," are independent. See,~, Ruben v. Secretary of DHHS, 22 Cl. Ct. 264, 266
(1991) (finding that, the word "or" connects two parts of a sentence, '''but disconnect
The phrase in Code § 18.2-308(D) allowing "any person" to apply for a permit in the county or city in which he resides and the phrase allowing "a member of the United States Armed Forces" to apply for a permit in the county or city in which he is domiciled are separated by a comma and the disjunctive "or." Thus, that language plainly indicates that if the applicant is a member of the United States Armed Forces, in addition to his right, as with any other person, to apply to the circuit court where he resides, he may alternatively apply for a permit to the circuit court where he is domiciled.
Accordingly, based on the circuit court's finding that petitioner is a resident of the City of Newport News, he is eligible to apply for a permit in that jurisdiction. The order appealed from is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News for entry of further orders consistent with this order.
-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.
VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org
http://www.geocities.com/rkba2da/vcdl20071011.pdf