Retired Marine offered NYC gun charge plea deal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
BTW, I did not notice a military service in Mr. Vance's Wiki biography
Click to expand...

What does military service have to do with anything? What other laws should veterans be exempt from?

BTW: i'm an Army retiree.
 
Last edited:
Please note question c on BATF Form 4473;

c. Have you been convicted in any court of a felony, or any other crime, for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year, even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?

If the maximum jail time for a Class A Misdemeanor is more than one year he just kissed his right to own a firearm goodbye.
 
I looked on a few carry sites. It can be confusing if you hit the wrong site. USA carry used to be the one, but now its polluted with advertisements.

I knew about the Sullivan law as I resided there for three years. I was totally shocked when I walked into a gun store and asked to see a shotgun.

The clerk, in most rude Brooklyn accent told me I could not even touch one of his guns without the proper permit.

What a load of crap!!

Handguns? fuhgitaboutit

I feel for this Marine. I wonder if writing the DA would do any good?
 
I actually just started a thread about this in another forum. While it is certainly his responsibility to know the laws of the area he is visiting, it doesn't stop me from being disgusted with the city in which I live. Proper punishment should be, "Thank you for protecting our sorry asses, here's your firearm back, don't do it again."
 
And what if he does do it again? What if he goes to another state? Give him 49 more, "now don't do it agains"????
 
I'd like to know the particulars of the potential misdemeanor. For instance; will it be expunged after a set period, what level of misdemeanor is it, does it involve a statement of "time served" and the like.

I faced the devil of a time in the Army once for a near "gross misdemeanor" for racing and fleeing (don't get on your high horse... it was rural interstate and "old school big blocks" not F&F mobiles in the city). The threat to my security clearance was my greatest concern and I found a widely varying interpretation of the impact of a misdemeanor both in the military and on the part of civilian employers after retirement.

All that being said, I get the impression that this Devil Dog would be well served by aggressive negotiations allowing the NY authorities to save face yet not saddle this particular leatherneck with a bad handle for life.

Additionally, his settling for a punishment well below the max serves future potential hapless law-breakers by establishing a record of a lower bar while allowing NY to throw the book at true ne'er-do-wells.
 
Most Class A misdemeanors in NY carry a penalty not to exceed one year and/or a max fine of $1000. EXCEPT for criminal possession of a weapon, which is not LESS than one year.

So, if the DA is not forthcoming about the specific misdemeanor charge being offered as a plea (and I've seen nothing specific described in the media), the charge should certainly be clarified before any plea is accepted. Criminal possession will have harsh ramifications.

Also, expungement is not likely to be an option option after the plea is accepted under NY law.

NY Criminal Procedure Law 160.50 permits the "sealing" of cases only where charges were dismissed, vacated, set-aside, not filed, or otherwise terminated. But, in this case, it would be a plea (conviction) and not a termination, so sealing does not apply.

Bottom line, NY does not allow expungements, or "sealings," of cases where a conviction was entered (except for some controlled substance, marijuana, and loitering offenses).
 
Thanks WOJOWNIK

See, there, that's the kind of material that would have been addressed by a good journalist. With these factors noted and in the open a more informed position can be taken on the matter.
 
Question really boils down to, do you think Bloomberg et all will WANT to try this case with the possibility of it opening up into another Heller vs. DC. I haven't followed it closely enough to know the details but both parties here have a bit to lose if you think about it.
 
My personal opinion is that both sides are are being problematic.

The DA could have offered a Class B misdemeanor all the way down to a simple violation. The press attention probably doesn't help, in their minds since Vance's office (the DA) has trying to be tough on "illegal guns".

The Marine's lawyers are pressing the issue in public, and that might backfire ... by forcing the DA's hand, rescinding the plea offer, and charging him with the whole nine yards with mandatory sentencing. Remember, the Manhattan DA's office has been tainted with a series of high profile failed prosecutions over the past year or two. They might feel compelled to "dig in" on this one...

As others have stated, this is just not a good situation for any involved.
 
With all due respect, I think the question really comes down to; is the felony charge worth it rather than taking negotiations out to the limit then settling as the alternative of a felony - which is what they'll no doubt go for and get if pressed.

After all, regardless of personal sentiments or points of view regarding the correctness of the law, he is in fact guilty as the law currently stands and without the deepest of pockets, an impassioned attorney and luck with a jury - he hasn't got a prayer, and even then...
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
With all due respect, I think the question really comes down to; is the felony charge worth it rather than taking negotiations out to the limit then settling as the alternative of a felony - which is what they'll no doubt go for and get if pressed.

After all, regardless of personal sentiments or points of view regarding the correctness of the law, he is in fact guilty as the law currently stands and without the deepest of pockets, an impassioned attorney and luck with a jury - he hasn't got a prayer, and even then...
Click to expand...
plus 1
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
With all due respect, I think the question really comes down to; is the felony charge worth it rather than taking negotiations out to the limit then settling as the alternative of a felony - which is what they'll no doubt go for and get if pressed.

After all, regardless of personal sentiments or points of view regarding the correctness of the law, he is in fact guilty as the law currently stands and without the deepest of pockets, an impassioned attorney and luck with a jury - he hasn't got a prayer, and even then...
Click to expand...

I concur with what you've stated above. Pretty much my underlying thought as well. The Marine's lawyers are maybe hoping the DA will come back with a Class B misdemeanor or even a violation (like the Tea Party guy).
 
Originally Posted by ApacheCoTodd
With all due respect, I think the question really comes down to; is the felony charge worth it rather than taking negotiations out to the limit then settling as the alternative of a felony - which is what they'll no doubt go for and get if pressed.

After all, regardless of personal sentiments or points of view regarding the correctness of the law, he is in fact guilty as the law currently stands and without the deepest of pockets, an impassioned attorney and luck with a jury - he hasn't got a prayer, and even then...

plus 1
Click to expand...

Methinks that copping a plea, paying a small fine and doing ten days communuity service would be preferable to a long stay at the Riker's Island jail.
 
Poor guy is gonna get cooked. I mean, does he have a legit defense, or is he banking on sympathy b/c he is a Marine and had a good excuse for carrying? Seems awfully naive...

Pride is only worth so much.
 
I can't imagine how they are compliant.

Is it not the case that, at certain levels, only an aggrieved party can appeal an unjust law? I don't know all the particulars, but can someone NOT accused of the heinous crime of carrying a self defense pistol into NYC do anything about this law?

(Maybe someone who understands the ins and outs of our justice system can elaborate.)

Maybe this Marine is playing activist and pushing the issue, looking for another Supreme Court case.
 
Is it not the case that, at certain levels, only an aggrieved party can appeal an unjust law? I don't know all the particulars, but can someone NOT accused of the heinous crime of carrying a self defense pistol into NYC do anything about this law?
Click to expand...

That's basically the case. The courts won't grant "standing" unless you're in the pokey or standing before them in chains. Somehow they think the fact that your following of their law is harming you is not sufficient.



This year CONgress changed the tax law on December 23rd. You'd think this would qualify as a prohibited "ex post facto" law. I know it's latain, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that changing the tax law for the current year in December is wrong. People have gone about the entire year using the existing regulations to figure their potential tax burden.

However, my research indicates that the black robed geniuses decided that the ex post facto provision doesn't apply to civil cases. Their logic is stand up comedy material. Yet the precedent has stood since 1798. (Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386 (1798)). You just can't make this stuff up.

Heller, likewise is pretty scary.

Just make sure to do your jury duty. You could be the peer someone really needs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Former Marine also gets deal with NYC gun arrest ...
Replies
9
Views
785
OLOVAC
O
D
  • Locked
Nationwide CCW assisted by arrest in New York ???
Replies
21
Views
1K
USAF_Vet
U
yokel
  • Locked
Marine sniper charged with voluntary manslaughter in Iraqi deaths
Replies
15
Views
1K
Jeff White
J
P
  • Locked
Burress' gun case postponed
Replies
2
Views
320
eye5600
E
Mainsail
  • Locked
Marine Amputee Acquitted On Gun Possession Charges
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
JImbothefiveth
J
Back
Top