I have my safety course and curiously called my local Chief to ask if an OUI with CWOF was a disqualifier. I was told yes. I wish I found this forum first. I also found info online that stated otherwise. Any input on this would be appreciated. Especially since I don’t want to call him on it if he is wrong and anger him. This was also two decades ago, which I told him.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
LTC With CWOF on OUI?
- Thread starter Deus
- Start date
headednorth
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 26,717
- Likes
- 49,330
Shouldn't be. A cwof is not a conviction.
lowbuckbob
NES Member
Continued WithOut a Finding. Arrested (or summonsed), charge(s) filed, continued indefinitely without a finding.
Last edited:
That’s what I thought. I did call a lawyer, waiting for a call back. Found his name in this forum. I was going to just apply and hope to have a discussion with the Chief and hope he would see that I am not the same person I was in my 20s. Am now married with 3 kids and a career. I called the lawyer just to make sure I go about this correctly the first time.
nstassel
NES Member
A cwof is an admission to sufficient facts to find you guilty but you are instead placed on probation for a specific period of time (not indefinite) after which if you successfully complete all the terms of probation the case is dismissed. Of course if you fail to fulfill all the obligations of probation, then you have a guilty finding imposed possibly. Oh and IAAL.
cockpitbob
NES Member
NEVER think that someone in law enforcement, or anyone with some control over your life, is a reasonable and well intentioned person. If the Chief is even a little anti-2A he'll use anything available to deny you, even if the letter of the law says he can't.
Lawyer up first.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,551
- Likes
- 33,615
I believe you are DQed during the time the CWOF is active.
Contact Comm2A - we may (emphasis, may) have some insight on the town. A legal consult with Langer, Guida or one of the other firearms law gurus would seem to be a wise investment.
Contact Comm2A - we may (emphasis, may) have some insight on the town. A legal consult with Langer, Guida or one of the other firearms law gurus would seem to be a wise investment.
You also must make sure the courts filed your paper work correctly. I had a CWF on a minor possesion and open container alcohol. When I went to renew my license paper work was not filed/entered or what ever they called it (20+ years ago). I had to go to court house. It did not take them long to find the issue and correct it. Just a PITA.
CWOF certainly should not be a DQ event, if your Chief is a prick he could deny on suitability, but then would need to give you the "why" in writing. My bride had the same think, many, many years ago, no issues with getting hers. Do NOT lie on your application, they will know. Highly recommend running a Cori report on yourself (google mass cori) to verify the charges and disposition are what you think they are.
You'll be in good hands with attorney Guida. (or with attorney nstassel for that matter). If attorney Guida think that Comm2A may be able to help, he'll reach out to us. The important thing is that you will never know unless you apply and deal with whatever the police chief might through in your way. You have nothing to lose. If you chose to do nothing, you've already given up.Contacted Guida on Friday, waiting for a call back
What is Comm-2A?
CORI is a waste of time/money. As I've stated dozens of times, CORI is a VERY sanitized version of the BOP that the police run/see. Go to the courthouse, clerk's office and get a copy of your docket sheet which lists the allegations and disposition. If errors are on it, have it corrected there (if possible). Make a copy and give a copy of the copy to your lawyer and also with your application.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,551
- Likes
- 33,615
Said before, but worth repeating. If you ever have the misfortune to interact with the court as a defendant, and do not end up a PP, get a court certified copy if the disposition at the time of the case and keep it 4ever.
Yup. They don't even let an in-duh-vidual see the police version of their own CORI.
Not indefinitely. It's continued for a specific time, with some kind of probation, could be unsupervised, then it is Dismissed. Technically there are two rulings, "Guilty" and "non-guilty" and Dismissed is part of non-guilty, but the reality is that a lot of PDs, maybe most, teat a CWOF/Dismissed as a Guilty/But-not-convicted.
I know you're a lawyer, and I respect what you say. But a CWOF does not require an admission of sufficient facts, although that is commonly what is done. I've done a lot of research on this and there is simply no requirement. I also have first hand experience with a CWOF without an admission of sufficient facts, I was adamant that I would in no way admit to any guilt. But this didn't stop the PD from continually saying I admitted to sufficient facts (even without the "greensheet" to back it up).
To the OP, if the CoP says you will be denied for what looks like is based on suitability, the reason doesn't matter, the courts will back him up on it, at least on the District level if not higher up. So if you are going to fight it, know in advance that you will need the $$ to go all the way. Personally I think your chances are better in Fed court but IANAL.
I would live to hear about a case showing I'm wrong about this, that the District Court granted a license on appeal of a suitability denial based on a CWOF/Dismissal. Or even a higher court.
nstassel
NES Member
To every rule there's an exception. I was party to a case where a judge took a plea of "continuance without a finding without a finding". But these things like your cwof without an admission are not legal pleas without the Commonwealth's assent. They are essentially pretrial probation and would be tossed on appeal if the commonwealth cared to.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,551
- Likes
- 33,615
That is exactly how the courts and insurance companies treat an OUI CWOF.
True, but it is often impossible to get the court to approve a CWOF without ASF.
This is why you need to get a court certified copy of the disposition at the time of the case.
Huh? How to you appeal a non-conviction?
There was one attorney who wrote an opinion that a CWOF w/ASF was a disqualifier if the offense ASFed to was a statutory disqualifier. He was absolutely wrong about this, but every one once in a while it crops up on some PD LTC instructions or web site.
I have a good friend that got a CWOF and didn't lose his LTC. He used to be an ADA that specifically prosecuted DUI's (oh the irony!). In any case he now gets delayed by the FBI so there was probably a communication to the NICS that somehow got bundled, but anyway he's good to go. So as others have mentioned the chief is making this decision on suitability, not statute.
Also, since this is relevant here, don't beat yourself up over it. I'm tired of hearing that you made a mistake etc. NO VICTIM NO CRIME. DUI is a means for the state to raise money and fear monger. I've been pulled over for DUI so many times I can't even count because I'm driving after 8PM on a Friday/Saturday so I must be drunk....it's ridiculous.
Also, since this is relevant here, don't beat yourself up over it. I'm tired of hearing that you made a mistake etc. NO VICTIM NO CRIME. DUI is a means for the state to raise money and fear monger. I've been pulled over for DUI so many times I can't even count because I'm driving after 8PM on a Friday/Saturday so I must be drunk....it's ridiculous.
Last edited:
My guess is that his initials are JS and he teaches that to police for in-service classes.
Would have been nice to know 18 years ago.
![[frown]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/003.gif "Frown [frown]")
This is what I found out. There are all sorts of procedures for clarifying (and correcting) records if you are convicted, or it says you are convicted. But nothing if the charges are Dismissed. I guess the court assumes Dismissed means Dismissed and there should be no negative repercussions. I tried going to my lawyer from the time to get help clearing this up, but he's a District Court Judge now so I can't even talk to him.
Would have been nice to know 18 years ago.
This is what I found out. There are all sorts of procedures for clarifying (and correcting) records if you are convicted, or it says you are convicted. But nothing if the charges are Dismissed. I guess the court assumes Dismissed means Dismissed and there should be no negative repercussions. I tried going to my lawyer from the time to get help clearing this up, but he's a District Court Judge now so I can't even talk to him.
Still not too late to visit the clerk's office and pull your file and get certified copies of what is there and pertinent. However, suitability really means (in MA) that if someone reported you for picking your nose and your chief thinks that makes you unsuitable, almost no MA judge will overrule his decision. So in your case it would be good to have, but most likely useless to change the chief's decision.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,551
- Likes
- 33,615
I am hoping someone 18 years hence thinks "Glad I read spewdrie's email back in '17".Would have been nice to know 18 years ago.
True, but I have heard of numerous cases where someone had a dismissal, CWOF, etc. and had to spend much time and money proving it was not a conviction due to the problems with old records. Just look at the thread about the guy who had to go to court over what a hand written scribble in the court docket meant.
