Need help locating some case law.

VetteGirlMA

VetteGirlMA

NES Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,376
Likes
23,388
Location
western mass
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
I've been having this discussion on X (twitter) with Mark Smith from the 4 boxes diner and Amy Swearer a legal scholar at the Heritage institute regarding having to choose one civil right vs another civil right. The conversation revolved around a Kamala Harris video where she desired to allow police to enter homes at will without a warrant to inspect guns.

Now here is where I need the help. I am trying to find a case, I can't remember the name but I remember some of the details:

Man had an LTC and a friend of his committed a crime.
The chief of police in the town knew they were both friends and told the man if he didn't testify about his friend the chief would yank his LTC.
The man refused to testify and instead sued MA.
The MA supreme court ruled essentially that the man had either a 5th amendment right to remain silent or a 2nd amendment right to keep and arms but couldn't have both.

The man was not involved in the crime, did not participate, was not even there, it was the chief putting pressure on the guy to force him to testify against his friend by confiscating his guns.

What I'm looking for is the name of the case because I want to point out to both Smith and Swearer that constitutional rights have been in jeopardy since before the Heller decision.

Does this ring any bells to anyone? I know one of you young strapping men will know the answer. Thanks in advance!
 
Offhand, I can't think of such a case, and I suspect this is an older case where something got lost in the retelling.

The 5th Amendment protection is against self-incrimination. You don't have a right to refuse to testify against another person. You don't have to cooperate with a police investigation, but if you are subpoenaed to testify either at trial or a grand jury you must appear. You don't have to volunteer testimony, but you do have to respond to questions asked of you unless doing so would incriminate you. Failure to do so can result in contempt charges.

Now it's possible that the police chief attempted to coerce the man to cooperate by threatening to pull his LTC. If this was a pre-McDonald case, the court would have ruled that he had no 2nd/14th amendment right to an LTC, because the 2nd amendment had yet to be incorporated. Post-McDonald, courts gave great deference to police determinations of unsuitability, but post Bruen it would take some pretty fancy legal dancing to claim that a refusal to cooperate creates the needed "risk to public safety."
 
Parker Schreiber said:
Offhand, I can't think of such a case, and I suspect this is an older case where something got lost in the retelling.

The 5th Amendment protection is against self-incrimination. You don't have a right to refuse to testify against another person. You don't have to cooperate with a police investigation, but if you are subpoenaed to testify either at trial or a grand jury you must appear. You don't have to volunteer testimony, but you do have to respond to questions asked of you unless doing so would incriminate you. Failure to do so can result in contempt charges.

Now it's possible that the police chief attempted to coerce the man to cooperate by threatening to pull his LTC. If this was a pre-McDonald case, the court would have ruled that he had no 2nd/14th amendment right to an LTC, because the 2nd amendment had yet to be incorporated. Post-McDonald, courts gave great deference to police determinations of unsuitability, but post Bruen it would take some pretty fancy legal dancing to claim that a refusal to cooperate creates the needed "risk to public safety."
Click to expand...
Yes this is an older case but since it has never been overruled it is still valid precedent.
 

GODFREY vs. CHIEF OF POLICE OF WELLESLEY, 35 Mass. App. Ct. 42

masscases.com masscases.com

A police chief's revocation of a person's license to carry firearms on the basis that he was no longer a "suitable person to be licensed to carry a firearm" was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, in circumstances where the person had refused to cooperate with the police in their investigation of gunshots having been fired into a school, a private residence and an automobile.


@VetteGirlMA this is a similar case, by exercising his 5th Amendment rights his 2A right were stripped based upon suitability.

Even post Bruen I would venture this would be a valid reason to deny a LTC or LTC renewal as it can be easily articulated
 
Last edited:
appraiser said:

GODFREY vs. CHIEF OF POLICE OF WELLESLEY, 35 Mass. App. Ct. 42

masscases.com masscases.com

A police chief's revocation of a person's license to carry firearms on the basis that he was no longer a "suitable person to be licensed to carry a firearm" was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, in circumstances where the person had refused to cooperate with the police in their investigation of gunshots having been fired into a school, a private residence and an automobile.

@VetteGirlMA this is a similar case, by exercising his 5th Amendment rights his 2A right were stripped based upon suitability.

Even post Bruen I would venture this would be a valid reason to deny a LTC or LTC renewal as it can be easily articulated
Click to expand...

That's the sort of case I expected was involved. There were neither 5th amendment nor 2nd amendment claims, and as was typical for the time, the court gave the police chief, "considerable latitude." But the court even noted that 'he might be entitled to some remedy upon proof of his claim that the revocation was "in retaliation" for his assertion of his rights.'

Not only has McDonald and Bruen changed the standard of review, the language of section 131 has also changed. The current statute reads "A determination of unsuitability shall be based on reliable, articulable and credible information that the applicant or licensee has exhibited or engaged in behavior that suggests that, if issued a license, the applicant or licensee may create a risk to public safety or a risk of danger to self or others." So this case is no longer good precedent.
 
appraiser said:

GODFREY vs. CHIEF OF POLICE OF WELLESLEY, 35 Mass. App. Ct. 42

masscases.com masscases.com

A police chief's revocation of a person's license to carry firearms on the basis that he was no longer a "suitable person to be licensed to carry a firearm" was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, in circumstances where the person had refused to cooperate with the police in their investigation of gunshots having been fired into a school, a private residence and an automobile.


@VetteGirlMA this is a similar case, by exercising his 5th Amendment rights his 2A right were stripped based upon suitability.

Even post Bruen I would venture this would be a valid reason to deny a LTC or LTC renewal as it can be easily articulated
Click to expand...
This might be the case. However, @Rob Boudrie would know if this was the case or could quote you the case he has referred to a number of times here on NES.
 
Back
Top Bottom