Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on Baker v Kealoha (Hawaii)

What excellent news. The 9th is really doing well for itself these days.

Willie

.

I would still like to see a different panel citing Peruta than the same one that issued the ruling.

Gotta love it! I was wondering how the Ninth Circuit Peruta Ruling would affect Hawaii since they are even more strict on issuing concealed handgun permits than CA is.

"I would still like to see a different panel citing Peruta than the same one that issued the ruling."


^ This.

When that happens it will be a very good day.



Willie

.

Obviously the 9th panel is trying to gin up some precedent for their ruling to further legitimize in before a similar case inevitably makes it to a less favorable panel (wherein you could have the court contradicting itself, but never having made a collective ruling). The more paperwork that is generated by overturning Peruta, the less likely anyone is to overturn it

TCB

I've read, no hard evidence to back it, that Honolulu Co, which is all of the island of Oahu, hasn't issued a pistol permit in 15 years.

If you're a resident retired officer, to carry under HR218 there they put you through several rings of hell that isn't required, and is probably illegal under LEOSA. It includes physical and mental evaluation by MD's and voluminous forms. Plus they require you to register your gun with them. This is before they allow you to be tested to state police standards at a range run by the one company they have selected to test you.

It's just unbelievable how bad things are there.

I'm convinced this is a throwback to colonial times when they wanted to keep native insurrections down after American business owners staged a coup and stole the islands from the Queen.

And the more rulings this panel issues supporting itself, the more pressure is on the 9th to grant or actually deny an en banc hearing on at least one of these.

As I understand it, the unique problem presented by the 9th is that due to its size (29 judges) a full en banc hearing is unweildy so it has special permission to form en banc panesl of 11 randomly selected judges. The result is that even an en banc hearing is still possibly a minority opinion and likely to be appealed. Recognizing this apparently, the 9th in spite of being the largest circuit, rarely grants en banc hearings.

the 9th in spite of being the largest circuit, rarely grants en banc hearings.

Click to expand...

So may it be in this case!

Great news, I'll have to check out 2aHawaii gun forum activity.

Probably a lot of excited people there. Hawaii is the worst, far beyond New Jersey and Maryland. No one can get a permit there.

Even Dano, off duty, has given up!

Is there any likelihood that the "en banc" court, no matter how comprised, might be agreeing tacitly, not to overturn "Peruta"? I know that 29 separate minds may never agree on anything, but might they see that getting overturned via McDonald or Heller is not good "court sense"? After all, the 9th Circuit is the most overturned court in the U.S.

^^^pendennis,
that doesn't seem to have stopped them in the past. That's why they are the most overturned circuit. Also have the rep of being the most liberal. The Peruta panel just happened to have two of the most—if not the two most—conservative judges in the circuit on the panel.

Does anyone know the % of en banc rulings from the 9th circuit that have been overturned on appeal vs rulings from 3 judge panels?

carpboy said:

Does anyone know the % of en banc rulings from the 9th circuit that have been overturned on appeal vs rulings from 3 judge panels?

Click to expand...

This will help

A Sixth Sense: 6th Circuit Has Surpassed the 9th as the Most Reversed Appeals Court

"since the fall of 2005, the 6th Circuit has been reversed 31 out of 38 times, for an 81.6 percent reversal rate, based on figures compiled by two Philadelphia lawyers. That leads all the federal circuits for that time period, with the 9th Circuit coming in as the second most reversed—100 out of 128 cases, or 78.1 percent."

So while the 9th had the most cases reversed, the 6th had the highest % reversed.

But there is no breakdown of panel vs en banc

.
This will help

A Sixth Sense: 6th Circuit Has Surpassed the 9th as the Most Reversed Appeals Court

"since the fall of 2005, the 6th Circuit has been reversed 31 out of 38 times, for an 81.6 percent reversal rate, based on figures compiled by two Philadelphia lawyers. That leads all the federal circuits for that time period, with the 9th Circuit coming in as the second most reversed—100 out of 128 cases, or 78.1 percent."

So while the 9th had the most cases reversed, the 6th had the highest % reversed.

But there is no breakdown of panel vs en banc
.

Click to expand...

Wow.


.

Yes, Wow.

Really builds confidence in the appellate system, doesn't it?

Interesting thought:

Suppose the court agrees to an en banc review of Peruta. They might well incorporate Richards into the review, but would they incorporate Baker, it being from a separate state and all? OK, if they don't and HI requests an en banc hearing, wouldn't the Circuit have to appoint a separate panel of 11 randomly drawn judges?

Now for the interesting part: Suppose one panel voted to overturn Peruta and the other one voted to uphold Baker (or vice versa)? Now we have a split WITHIN the 9th Circuit! What happens then?

Pass the popcorn!

There is a high risk of an intra circuit split in situations like your example, but remember, they don't have to grant an en banc just because it is requested, and the 9th grants few. And ifn special cases, they can empanel all 29 judges for a full en banc hearing.

JRH; thanks for that tid bit about the 6th circuit leading in the number of reversals.If as you say the 9th circuit grants few appeals for en banc reviews, then logically most of the reversals would be of rulings by 3 judge panels.In the case of an intra-cicuit split, I would imagine that at least one judge would call for a en banc review of the ruling that led to the split.

carpboy, your welcome, and not to quibble but the 6th leads in % of reversals, not number. 9th still leads in number (not unexpected being the largest circuit).

The 9th Circuit really needs to be divided onto 2 or more circuits, by no one can figure out how to do it without having at least one resulting cirucit still be too large for full en banc panels. With 61 district courts, California is the problem. They really don't want to split the state between two circuits, nor do they want to make California a separate circuit all by itself.

"The 9th Circuit really needs to be divided onto 2 or more circuits"

With their reliance on smaller panels, it sounds like they already have

"They really don't want to split the state between two circuits"
California's working on making it so they don't have to

TCB

How about this breakdown -
Ninth Circuit

• California
• Hawaii
• Alaska
• Northern Marianas
• Guam

New Twelfth Circuit

• Washington
• Oregon
• Idaho
• Montana
• Nevada
• Arizona

^^^I think that would still leave the 9th with too many judges (or very close). It only had 23 when the current limited en banc procedure was instituted.


Here is an interesting article on the subject

I think that would still leave the 9th with too many judges

Click to expand...

Can't they fire some judges?

Reducing the number of judges would be counter-productive. Congress sets the number of judges in a circuit, just as it set the number of district courts, to keep the workload manageable. California has 61 federal district courts, the most of any single state. Texas is second with 53.

The thing is, full en banc panels are relatively rare in all circuits. The 9th just has the special situation of having limited en banc panels when they do grant an en banc hearing.