×

Peruta v. San Diego 9th Circuit Court Decision

May 2, 2014

Latest: Update 7/1/2014: San Diego County filed a response with the 9th Circuit Court of appeals, saying basically they are fine with the intervention of the State AG and argue the case is not moot since they are still sitting on applications awaiting a final decision. You can read that filed response by clicking here.CRPA is still awaiting word from our attorney regarding the final decision of the court.

(Updated 5/16/14) San Diego County filed a response with the 9th Circuit Court of appeals saying, basically, they are fine with the intervention of the State Attorney General, and argue the case is not moot since they are still sitting on applications awaiting a final decision. You can read that filed response here. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has still yet to make a final decision.

(Updated 3/16/14) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered a response from affected parties to pending motions to intervene in the case of Peruta vs. County of San Diego, that San Diego County Sheriff William D. Gore declined to appeal.

Each response must address the motion to intervene by the State of California (in lieu of the Sheriff) and by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Each response must also address the petition for rehearing en banc by the California Police Chiefs Association and the California Peace Officers Association.

The order required that the responses be filed with the Court by March 26.

(Updated 3/5/14) The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced Monday (March 3, 2014)  that it has issued a stay, or suspension, of its own Feb. 13th 2-1 ruling that declared the rules to apply for concealed weapons in urban parts of California, including Orange County, unconstitutional.

(Updated 2/28/14) Late last Thursday (February 27, 2014), California State Attorney General Kamala Harris filed a petition on behalf of the state to ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review and reverse its decision in Peruta v. County of San Diego. That ruling two weeks ago said the county’s restrictive concealed carry permit laws that required “good cause” were unconstitutional. This comes just one week after San Diego Sheriff Bill Gore said he would not seek en banc review and would start issuing permits based on self-defense once the appeals court decision was finalized.

Ms. Harris wrote in the filing that the state should be allowed to intervene in the case because “this case draws into question the constitutionality of the State’s statutory scheme regulating the public carrying of firearms.” She added that the “existing parties will not adequately represent the State’s interests.”

Chuck Michel is the west coast counsel for National Rifle Association, which funded the lawsuit. (Michel is also litigation counsel for CRPA, The CRPA Foundation was one of the plaintiffs in Peruta.) He said Ms. Harris‘ motion to intervene was far out of line because her office wasn’t part of the lawsuit, despite repeated requests from both plaintiffs and Sheriff Gore to get involved. “They are trying to improperly influence the court,” Mr. Michel said in an interview. “They are stretching the rules to file in order to get their arguments in front of the court in the hopes that a liberal judge will get the message and ask for a vote himself.”

The Circuit Court judges have until March 7 to ask for a vote on rehearing the case.

Via: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/27/california-attorney-general-tries-overturn-gun-car/#ixzz2v1ijVHr1

Latest: Update 7/1/2014: San Diego County filed a response with the 9th Circuit Court of appeals, saying basically they are fine with the intervention of the State AG and argue the case is not moot since they are still sitting on applications awaiting a final decision. You can read that filed response by clicking here.CRPA is still awaiting word from our attorney regarding the final decision of the court.

Leave a Reply