Steve in PA
Member
Stankus overruled, tax evader allowed weapons permit
By TERRIE MORGAN-BESECKER
[email protected]
WILKES-BARRE - A Sugarloaf Township man has once again won an appeal of a ruling that prevented him from holding a concealed-weapons permit because he pleaded no contest in 1978 to federal tax evasion.
Michael S. Pecora has been battling the Luzerne County Sheriff's Office since 1996, when his renewal permit was denied by then-Sheriff Carl Zawatski based on a law that precludes people convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison from holding a weapons permit.
Pecora appealed that decision, and in 1998 Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas Judge Mark Ciavarella ruled Pecora was entitled to a weapons permit because his conviction met one of two exceptions within the law.
Pecora once again applied for a permit, but the renewal was denied in 2001 by Zawatski's successor, Sheriff Barry Stankus. Stankus acknowledged Pecora obtained a 1998 court order that restored the license, but he maintained the enforcement of that order would lead to "inequitable administration of the law."
In a ruling issued Tuesday, Judge Ann Lokuta rejected Stankus' challenge to the permit, saying the Sheriff's Office never appealed Ciavarella's 1998 ruling to a higher court, therefore the order was a "final" order. Because the order was final, Stankus could not relitigate the matter, Lokuta said.
Pecora's case is one of several cases that have challenged the state's Uniform Firearms Act and the Federal Gun Control Act. Provisions within both acts have sometimes precluded people convicted of relatively minor crimes from owning firearms or obtaining a concealed weapons permit. Pecora and others have maintained they were being unfairly penalized by having the laws retroactively applied.
In 2002 the state Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Michael Lehman of Lancaster, who was denied the right to own a gun because he had stolen a $3.88 case of beer in 1962. At the time, the theft was punishable by up to five years in prison. That triggered the law, even though under current law the crime would result in a maximum 90-day sentence. The high court has not yet entered a decision in that matter.
Stankus could not be reached for comment late Tuesday afternoon regarding whether he will appeal Lokuta's ruling.
http://www.timesleader.com/mld/thetimesleader/news/6360990.htm
By TERRIE MORGAN-BESECKER
[email protected]
WILKES-BARRE - A Sugarloaf Township man has once again won an appeal of a ruling that prevented him from holding a concealed-weapons permit because he pleaded no contest in 1978 to federal tax evasion.
Michael S. Pecora has been battling the Luzerne County Sheriff's Office since 1996, when his renewal permit was denied by then-Sheriff Carl Zawatski based on a law that precludes people convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison from holding a weapons permit.
Pecora appealed that decision, and in 1998 Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas Judge Mark Ciavarella ruled Pecora was entitled to a weapons permit because his conviction met one of two exceptions within the law.
Pecora once again applied for a permit, but the renewal was denied in 2001 by Zawatski's successor, Sheriff Barry Stankus. Stankus acknowledged Pecora obtained a 1998 court order that restored the license, but he maintained the enforcement of that order would lead to "inequitable administration of the law."
In a ruling issued Tuesday, Judge Ann Lokuta rejected Stankus' challenge to the permit, saying the Sheriff's Office never appealed Ciavarella's 1998 ruling to a higher court, therefore the order was a "final" order. Because the order was final, Stankus could not relitigate the matter, Lokuta said.
Pecora's case is one of several cases that have challenged the state's Uniform Firearms Act and the Federal Gun Control Act. Provisions within both acts have sometimes precluded people convicted of relatively minor crimes from owning firearms or obtaining a concealed weapons permit. Pecora and others have maintained they were being unfairly penalized by having the laws retroactively applied.
In 2002 the state Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Michael Lehman of Lancaster, who was denied the right to own a gun because he had stolen a $3.88 case of beer in 1962. At the time, the theft was punishable by up to five years in prison. That triggered the law, even though under current law the crime would result in a maximum 90-day sentence. The high court has not yet entered a decision in that matter.
Stankus could not be reached for comment late Tuesday afternoon regarding whether he will appeal Lokuta's ruling.
http://www.timesleader.com/mld/thetimesleader/news/6360990.htm
