Officer Frisk Allowed, Even with Concealed Carry Law

A person that is lawfully stopped by an officer may be subject to a frisk, even if the state grants concealed-carry permits to its citizens

United States v. Robinson, 2017 BL 18217, 4th Cir. en banc, No. 14-4902, 1/23/17.

The Fourth Circuit held that officers may frisk lawfully stopped citizens in states that grant concealed-carry permits, following the jurisprudence developed under Terry v. Ohio, Pennsylvania v. Mimms, and their progeny. The purpose of a frisk is to prevent the violent use of a weapon, so an officer frisk is warranted even if the person’s possession of a gun is allowed under the state’s concealed-carry laws. Even if there is a concealed-carry law in place, it does not necessarily prevent the danger that an encounter with a law enforcement officer imposes.

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/United_States_v_Robinson_No_144902_2017_BL_18217_4th_Cir_Jan_23_2?1486503049

Right to Carry a Concealed Weapon Not Protected by the Second Amendment

The Ninth Circuit found that the Second Amendment does not extend in protecting members of the general public while they carry a concealed firearm in public without a permit

Peruta v. Cty. of San Diego, 2016 BL 183925, 9th Cir., en banc, No. 10-56971, 6/9/16.

   Under California law, members of the general public must show “good cause” to carry a concealed weapon. “Good cause” is determined by local sheriffs, and in San Diego and Yolo counties, a person must state a specific reason to establish “good cause.” The court found that this standard, both at the state and county levels in this case, were “a reasonable limitation of the right to carry firearms in public.” The court, however, avoided to comment “whether the Second Amendment protects the ability to carry firearms in public, such as open carry.”

http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Peruta_v_County_of_San_Diego_No_1056971_2016_BL_183925_9th_Cir_Ju.

Second Amendment Does Not Protect Paring Knives

Very divided Washington Supreme Court rules that carrying a kitchen knife in public is not covered by the Second Amendment.

 

City of Seattle v. Evans, 2015 BL 435678, Wash., No. 90608-4, 12/31/15

    The Washington Supreme Court characterized the knife in this case as a "utility tool" and as such, allowed no more protection than a frying pan, rolling pin, or other culinary utensil that may be used as an instrument of self-defense.

    The court said that "[w]hile almost any common object may be used as a weapon, that does not necessarily mean that possession of otherwise innocuous objects that could be wielded with malice will trigger the constitutional protections afforded to 'arms'."

    The court recognized and agreed with most modern decisions which have held that the right to bear arms is not limited to firearms, but includes less lethal weapons as well. In this case, however, the court added that to receive Second Amendment protections the "weapons" must be of the type that law-abiding citizens traditionally turn to for self-defense.

    Here, the defendant's knife was a culinary tool and he went too far when arguing that a utensil that is customarily used to cut fruit and vegetables fits within the traditional definition of "weapon." The court said that "[w]ere we to adopt [the defendant]'s analysis and hold that a kitchen knife was a protected arm because it could be used as self-defense, there would be no end to the extent of utensils arguably constitutionally protected as arms."

http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/City_of_Seattle_v_Evans_No_906084_2015_BL_435678_Wash_Dec_31_2015?1452972030

Broken Pistol Not A "Concealed Deadly Weapon"

The court used a "common-sense reality check" to state that a broken pistol is not a deadly weapon.

 

In re J.T., Ohio, No. 2014-0449, Sept. 10, 2015

The Ohio Supreme Court rejected the state's claim that the broken firearm, being carried in the waistband, counted as a deadly weapon because it could be used as a bludgeon, like a club or nightstick. The court stated that it "was no more of a deadly weapon than is a laptop computer or a briefcase, yet attorneys are not routinely arrested for carrying concealed weapons as they enter our courthouses."

http://www2.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/In_re_JT_2015Ohio3654_Ohio_Sept_10_2015_Court_Opinion