Applying for LTCH w/ Misdemeanor(s)

[EXLINE]

So my brother decided he wants to apply for his LTCH and I just wanted to get some information for him if I could. He has been convicted of Possession of Paraphernalia a class A Misdemeanor on 3 different occasions. 2008, 2010, 2011. Being pot paraphernalia. So....(I know) Do you think he will be denied for not being a "proper person"?

 

[rnmcguire]

I would say there's a very high probability of being denied. Drug charges are a no no.

 

[longbarrel]

Don't know, don't think so, but make damn certain that he doesn't lie on his application. If he does he's pretty much guaranteed a denial.

 

[stephen87]

I would say there's a very high probability of being denied. Drug charges are a no no.

This. Drug charges do not seem to be an auto denial, however a history of drug abuse is an automatic denial. I'd say with 3 drug convictions, whether a misdemeanor or a felony, it will be an auto denial. Not saying he shouldn't try, however he shouldn't be surprised if he is denied.

 

[Nacho Man]

I think it has to be 3 years from the last misdemeanor drug conviction, or dui. So he should be ok by 2014. Eventhough its just a weed pipe, it is a drug related conviction.

 

[rnmcguire]

IC 35-47-1-4<a name="IC35-47-1-4">
"Drug abuser"
Sec. 4. "Drug abuser" means an individual who has had two (2) or more violations of IC 35-48-1, IC 35-48-2, IC 35-48-3, or IC 35-48-4, any one (1) of which resulted in conviction by a court or treatment in a drug abuse facility within five (5) years prior to the date of application.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32.

 

[rnmcguire]

IC 35-47-1-7
"Proper person"
Sec. 7. "Proper person" means a person who:
(1) does not have a conviction for resisting law enforcement under IC 35-44.1-3-1 within five (5) years before the person applies for a license or permit under this chapter;
(2) does not have a conviction for a crime for which the person could have been sentenced for more than one (1) year;
(3) does not have a conviction for a crime of domestic violence (as defined in IC 35-31.5-2-78), unless a court has restored the person's right to possess a firearm under IC 35-47-4-7;
(4) is not prohibited by a court order from possessing a
handgun;
(5) does not have a record of being an alcohol or drug abuser as defined in this chapter;
(6) does not have documented evidence which would give rise to a reasonable belief that the person has a propensity for violent or emotionally unstable conduct;
(7) does not make a false statement of material fact on the person's application;
(8) does not have a conviction for any crime involving an inability to safely handle a handgun;
(9) does not have a conviction for violation of the provisions of this article within five (5) years of the person's application;
(10) does not have an adjudication as a delinquent child for an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, if the person applying for a license or permit under this chapter is less than twenty-three (23) years of age;

 

[Nacho Man]

Oops, I guess its 5 years. So 2016 if he behaves himself.

 

[stephen87]

Nevermind, I missed subsection 9.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

So my brother decided he wants to apply for his LTCH and I just wanted to get some information for him if I could. He has been convicted of Possession of Paraphernalia a class A Misdemeanor on 3 different occasions. 2008, 2010, 2011. Being pot paraphernalia. So....(I know) Do you think he will be denied for not being a "proper person"?

Your brother has 3 separate convictions for Possession of Paraphernalia? If so, he's a felon.


IC 35-48-4-8.3
Possession of paraphernalia
Sec. 8.3. (a) A person who possesses a raw material, an instrument, a device, or other object that the person intends to use for:
(1) introducing into the person's body a controlled substance;
(2) testing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of a controlled

substance; or
(3) enhancing the effect of a controlled substance;
in violation of this chapter commits a Class A infraction for possessing paraphernalia.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally violates subsection (a) commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior unrelated judgment or conviction under this section.
(c) A person who recklessly possesses a raw material, an instrument, a device, or other object that is to be used primarily for:
(1) introducing into the person's body a controlled substance;
(2) testing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of a controlled substance; or
(3) enhancing the effect of a controlled substance;
in violation of this chapter commits reckless possession of paraphernalia, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a previous judgment or conviction under this section.
As added by Acts 1980, P.L.115, SEC.4. Amended by P.L.202-1989, SEC.5; P.L.166-1990, SEC.2; P.L.58-2003, SEC.1.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Maybe. If the prosecutor(s) in those three cases neglected to file the appropriate charges, he may have fell through the cracks and eluded felony charges. That doesn't mean the ISP has to honor those cracks, though. They could still consider him a felon and reject his app on that basis, or another. Sounds like there are so many ways to refuse this guy an LTCH, the only question is which one will be cited.

 

[netsecurity]

What a shame, we all know that MJ causes insanity and murder. A lot of people, ESPECIALLY cops, abuse the hell out of alcohol, then wage war on people who smoke pot, putting them in jail for something hardly more dangerous than tobacco, and miniscule as compared to the dangers of alcohol.



Prohibition ruins lives, and does not prevent the sale of MJ. A lot of good people do nothing wrong besides smoke a joint, and end up with a criminal record. So long as MJ exists, people will be tempted to smoke it, and I don't see how that is a crime in any sense of the word. Smoking it while driving, sure that's the same exact crime as driving on OTC cough syrup though, and you all have probably done that a thousand times.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

What a shame, we all know that MJ causes insanity and murder. A lot of people, ESPECIALLY cops, abuse the hell out of alcohol, then wage war on people who smoke pot, putting them in jail for something hardly more dangerous than tobacco, and miniscule as compared to the dangers of alcohol.

How stupid of me to think that I could take a break from INGO and then return and actually think that I could have a logical discussion about anything without someone making a boneheaded statement about cops. I know the members of INGO like you are in the minority, but like cops that do something stupid and the rest of us get punished/ridiculed/hated for it, you make the good members of INGO look like a bunch of ignorant *******s.

 

[netsecurity]

How stupid of me to think that I could take a break from INGO and then return and actually think that I could have a logical discussion about anything without someone making a boneheaded statement about cops. I know the members of INGO like you are in the minority, but like cops that do something stupid and the rest of us get punished/ridiculed/hated for it, you make the good members of INGO look like a bunch of ignorant *******s.

You disagree and call me names? Am I not entitled to my opinion? I KNOW a lot of cops drink A LOT. It is probably because of the stress of the job. I have nothing against cops, except the ones that make it their personal obsession to press charges against innocent people who smoke. They have the discretion to throw away the illegal substance without ruining someone's life over it by giving them a criminal record. I see these kind of cops the same as the nerd in high school that tattle tales on other kids for chewing gum or something, except worse because they are most likely also hypocrites.

 

[LEaSH]

lolz.


herreeeeee weeeee gooooooo.

 

[rnmcguire]

Oh boy, here we go. Let's stay on topic here folks. This thread isn't about drug legalization or police popularity.

 

[Kutnupe14]

***sigh***

(runs off to get a beer)

lol

 

[netsecurity]

Oh boy, here we go. Let's stay on topic here folks. This thread isn't about drug legalization or police popularity.

No, the thread is not about legalization, but I bet his brother has far more problems because of his misdemeanors than just his LTCH (i.e. jobs). So it is a shame, plane and simple, and that was my point, unless he was being violent or something and took a plea for the pot charges, which is common. I was not attacking police, just pointing out the hypocrisy, and if you dispute the fact that many cops drink, then I doubt your sincerity, because it is a well known phenomena. And no, I'm not an idiot, I have a college degree and work for a living (and I don't smoke).

Alcoholism Among Law Enforcement Personnel: Its Unique Challenges | Milestone Group NJ
Alcohol abuse: A police tradition that needs to end | Editorials & Opinions | Fort Worth, Arl...

 

[EXLINE]

Your brother has 3 separate convictions for Possession of Paraphernalia? If so, he's a felon.


IC 35-48-4-8.3
Possession of paraphernalia
Sec. 8.3. (a) A person who possesses a raw material, an instrument, a device, or other object that the person intends to use for:
(1) introducing into the person's body a controlled substance;
(2) testing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of a controlled

substance; or
(3) enhancing the effect of a controlled substance;
in violation of this chapter commits a Class A infraction for possessing paraphernalia.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally violates subsection (a) commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior unrelated judgment or conviction under this section.
(c) A person who recklessly possesses a raw material, an instrument, a device, or other object that is to be used primarily for:
(1) introducing into the person's body a controlled substance;
(2) testing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of a controlled substance; or
(3) enhancing the effect of a controlled substance;
in violation of this chapter commits reckless possession of paraphernalia, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a previous judgment or conviction under this section.
As added by Acts 1980, P.L.115, SEC.4. Amended by P.L.202-1989, SEC.5; P.L.166-1990, SEC.2; P.L.58-2003, SEC.1.

They are all Misdemeanors. His first 2 were misdemeanor charges and convictions and the last one he got was charged as a felony but we he went to court he got AMS which is alternate misd. sentencing which i guess you get once. He has a pretty good attorney I'm guessing.

 

[Excalibur]

When I applied, I had to fight because the local PD guy responsible for my application said I lied on my form, which was I check NO, I was never convicted of a crime. I was charged for driving too fast on the highway, which was fast enough that they deem it reckless driving. I went to court, never convicted and charges dropped. It's still in my record though. So I read the fine print and was correct. The PD emailed me back about his BS excuse as to why he wanted to reject my app. I got the state police to contact my local PD and the next day, I got my LTCH. I wish Indiana didn't need to apply for my right to carry, but I will fight for my right.