Heller made retroactive in DC

[Rex B]

Highest Court in D.C. Allows Second Amendment Challenges to Long-Ago Convictions for Violating D.C. Handgun Ban

(by Eugene Volokh)

"Magnus v. U.S., decided today, concludes that a defendant who pled guilty in 1996 to violating D.C. handgun ban can now have that plea set aside given D.C. v. Heller"

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/volokh/m ... 6Pu7vOyBU/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Pawpaw]

This makes perfect sense to me.

If the law is unconstitutional today, it was unconstitutional in 1996 or any other time.

[RHenriksen]

Beautiful.

[Katygunnut]

This makes perfect sense to me.

If the law is unconstitutional today, it was unconstitutional in 1996 or any other time.

It should be retroactive to the ratification of the 2nd Ammendment (which predated DC's law).

[OldCurlyWolf]

Highest Court in D.C. Allows Second Amendment Challenges to Long-Ago Convictions for Violating D.C. Handgun Ban

(by Eugene Volokh)

"Magnus v. U.S., decided today, concludes that a defendant who pled guilty in 1996 to violating D.C. handgun ban can now have that plea set aside given D.C. v. Heller"

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/volokh/m ... 6Pu7vOyBU/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That would include cases for the last 36 years. I hope they sue DC for court costs and lawyer fees too.

[RPB]

I hope every single convicted person files and gets their record cleared (if they have to file requests to expunge or whatever). That should fill up a building with paperwork a while and teach them not to pass ridiculous unconstitutional laws.

[chartreuse]

Excellent news!

[b322da]

Mr. Magnus -- our new poster boy for the cause, a drug dealer who bought the guns illegally on the street. I suppose this decision means, "Bad facts make good law."

The case was remanded to the district court giving it plenty of room for another conviction. I doubt that we have heard the end of this case. It was decided by 3 of some dozen or more judges on the DC Court of Appeals. Next will most likely be a motion for rehearing en banc.

Elmo

[HankB]

Hmmm . . .

Let's say someone got a felony conviction 20 years ago, and that felony conviction is now going to be set aside because of Heller.

If he got an additional Federal felony conviction, say, 15 years ago for being "felon in possession of a firearm" would that conviction also be set aside, since the original felony conviction would be vacated?

In any case, D.C. ought to pay all legal appeal fees for everyone convicted of violating their unconstitutional law - there ought to be consequences for violating the Constitution.

[lrb111]

It may just be me, but this caused me to just burst into laughter. Then tell my wife so she could bust out laughing. Then share with like minded relatives.
Love it.