Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Comment on 14th Amendment cases | Main | IL Supreme Court on Lawful Protection of Commerce Act »

Charges against X-Caliber Guns dismissed

Posted by David Hardy · 19 March 2009 09:13 AM

This is a strange case. The Arizona Attorney General (not ATF) brought State charges against a Phoenix-area gun dealer, claiming he'd supplied over 700 guns to Mexican drug cartels.

And the AG loses on a directed verdict -- meaning the judge finds that the evidence is nonexistent: no rational juror could find for the prosecution.

And then the AG's office says it will appeal. ???? Ever hear of double jeopardy? He was on trial, jeopardy clearly attached by any standard (I forget the AZ rule, but jeopardy usually attaches when the jury is empanelled or when the first witness begins testimony, and a motion for DV is made when the prosecution finishes its case, much later), and he can't be retried.

UPDATE: here's the ruling, in pdf. The State charges were under the "scheme or artifice" statute, and the court says that materiality is a requirement there (in the typical case, that it was something where if the person knew the truth they'd not buy, or otherwise would act differently), and the court notes that the prosecution was unable to prove a single gun wound up in the hands of someone who couldn't legally possess it. Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence.
Hat tip to Practical Tactical....

8 Comments | Leave a comment

RKV | March 19, 2009 10:46 AM | Reply

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/arizona_in_the_cross_hairs.html

Somebody ought to tell George Will he's barking up the wrong tree.

cory | March 19, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply

Laffo... Was watching the local news last night and they were talking about this. Apparently the "reporters" haven't yet heard that there's no evidence against this guy, because the "report" was awfully accusatory. Even featured a line something like "these assault rifles were used in some of the most brutal murders of the mexican drug wars."

Carl in Chicago | March 19, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply

"Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence."

Sigh ...

WP Zeller | March 19, 2009 2:37 PM | Reply

Well, all that hokey "rights" stuff may not be incorporated, but it's clear the Fourth Estate is.

Tim Weaver | March 19, 2009 2:45 PM | Reply

David,
One thing to remember is that while the state AG's office was the actual prosecuting agency in this case, the ATF was heavily involved. Makes one wonder why, if the owner did what he was accused of, the ATF didn't go after them for violating federal firearm law violations.

Critic | March 19, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply

I'm very curious what the theory of the prosecution was. What evidence did they present which they considered sufficient for a conviction? The prosecution's theory and evidence was apparently good enough to get some of the guy's co-defendants to plead guilty to felonies.

Kirk Parker | March 20, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply

"Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence."

Wow; there's a first time for everything!

Random Numbes | March 20, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply

Rights? You don't have no steenkin' rights! I have an agenda to pursue here!

Leave a comment