I was just alerted (by the new issue of Gun Week) to the 8/27/03 case of
U.S. v. Gayle et al., #02-1095. The appellant was Ingram. He had been
convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm (among other things).
The 2nd circuit reversed this conviction, holding that the statutory phrase
about having been convicted "in any court" of an offense punishable by more
than a year imprisonment, did not include foreign courts. Mr. Ingram's
conviction was in Canada. The decision notes that the 10th circuit came to
the same conclusion, while the 3rd, 4th, and 6th ruled that "any court"
includes foreign courts.
I take this listing to mean that the 5th circuit has not considered the
question.
So the question is this: Is it clear that Bean really is prohibited from
firearms possession? Put another way, did he clearly need to seek
reinstatement of his firearms rights?
Put in the most useful way, would anything prevent him from seeking a
declaratory judgment that he is not, in fact, disabled from firearms
ownership, because his conviction was in a foreign court?
--
Bob Woolley
St. Paul, MN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature
is in session.
--Mark Twain
