Ind. Ct. App.: Carrying on Expired License is Not Misuse

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    48,028
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    Lunchtime Court of Appeals reading:

    Trice v. State of Indiana: March of 2017 Marques Trice pulled over by IMPD. Trice volunteers handgun in center console. Trice convicted of Carry Without Larry. Trial court (Marion County Super 10) orders handgun destroyed. Defendant objects and appeals.

    Indiana Court of Appeals (2-1) holds that simply Carrying Without Larrying is not "misuse" under Indiana and such destruction is illegal.

    https://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11131801bb.pdf
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Posted this yesterday in the IMPD no-return policy thread.

    Interesting case today in the court of appeals.

    https://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11131801bb.pdf

    Mr. Trice was pulled over for an equipment violation in Indianapolis (AKA "pretext"). He was asked if he had any weapons in the car and he responded affirmatively. There was a pistol in the center console. Turns out his Larry had expired 2 years earlier. He was charged with CHWOL. He was convicted. (It is unclear if he actually tried to renew his Larry between charging and trial, but the court indicated his lack of criminal history was a mitigating factor.)*

    As part of the sentence, the trial court ordered that the gun should be destroyed.

    Court of appeals (Barteau writing; Robb joining) says that carrying without a license isn't "misuse" so the gun can't be destroyed. There was a dissent (Crone) who points out that carrying illegally can be considered misuse. (Appellate geek moment: that's an interesting panel to reach that decision.)**

    *Quick search and, other than another CHWOL, it doesn't look like he's got much of a criminal history. Some ordinance violations, and that's about it.

    ETA:

    LMAO

    So. The other CHWOL was dismissed on September 25, 2017, and from the docket it looks like there was a problem with the prosecutor's case. Like, a witness or something didn't show up, because a continuance on the day of trial was denied. Then, he was pulled over on October 13, 2017, for the equipment violation. About 2.5 weeks later.

    Total coincidence. ;)

    ETA2:
    For those of you playing along at home, these judges, the majority of whom decided not to destroy this firearm, were appointed by Bayh, O'Bannon, and Kernan.
     
    Top Bottom