Out-of-state licenses valid in Illinois after all?
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:51 pm
http://volokh.com/2011/04/14/illinois-s ... heir-cars/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/S ... 109130.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This could be very interesting for out-of-staters who find themselves in Illinois.
Illinois Supreme Court recently ruled that an out-of-state gun license counts the same as an Illinois Firearms Owner Identification card under Illinois law, over-ruling both the trial and appellate courts, and reversed the conviction of an Indiana man with a CHL who was convicted on two counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon for having a handgun in the center console of the rear seat of his vehicle.
Without a FOID, you are not supposed to have a gun in Illinois, at least not in your car, even if unloaded and cased and out of your reach. I believe neither are you supposed to have on at home or anywhere else without a FOID. Illinois will not issue a FOID to non-residents. So on the face of it, it appears that there is no legal way for out-of-state people to legally have a gun in their possession when in the state of Illinois.
But. There is a clause of the FOID statute that says, “ ...The provisions of this Section regarding the possession of firearms and firearm ammunition do not apply to...Nonresidents who are currently licensed or registered to possess a firearm in their resident state[.]”
The trial court would not let the defendent (his attorney, really) bring this to the attention of the jury, and neither would the trial court. The prosecution argued that the exception to the FOID statute didn't have anything to do with the aggravated unlawful carry statute (even though one of the elements of aggravated unlawful carry is not having a FOID), and the trial and appellate courts bought it. The Illinois supreme court did not.
The actual case is a bit more complex, worth reading I think, and provides an example of why, when stopped, not complicating the officer's life by volunteering unnecessary information might be a good strategy, especially if you are in unfriendly territory.
There is another case from a couple years ago where an Indiana woman was suing the State of Illinois on 2A/Heller grounds because she could not legally have a gun with her while staying at an Illinois friend's house (something she does regularly for business trips, and she has her friend's permission) because the ISP will not issue her an FOID. I do not know yet if that is still in the system, but this may provide a solution to her situation.
UPDATE X 2 (already): I was wrong about the state -- it was an OHIO woman. Interestingly, the state of illinois argued for dismissal of the case because of the clause I cited above -- that people with licenses of from other states CAN have a gun in Illinois. Only problem is, Ohio does not have any licensing scheme. No licenses required to have a gun (good in general) but apparently (she argues) the ohio CCW license does not qualify (?). So she is still out of luck. Therefore the federal court did not grant Illinois' motion for dismissal, and the case is still in federal court.
http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/S ... 109130.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This could be very interesting for out-of-staters who find themselves in Illinois.
Illinois Supreme Court recently ruled that an out-of-state gun license counts the same as an Illinois Firearms Owner Identification card under Illinois law, over-ruling both the trial and appellate courts, and reversed the conviction of an Indiana man with a CHL who was convicted on two counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon for having a handgun in the center console of the rear seat of his vehicle.
Without a FOID, you are not supposed to have a gun in Illinois, at least not in your car, even if unloaded and cased and out of your reach. I believe neither are you supposed to have on at home or anywhere else without a FOID. Illinois will not issue a FOID to non-residents. So on the face of it, it appears that there is no legal way for out-of-state people to legally have a gun in their possession when in the state of Illinois.
But. There is a clause of the FOID statute that says, “ ...The provisions of this Section regarding the possession of firearms and firearm ammunition do not apply to...Nonresidents who are currently licensed or registered to possess a firearm in their resident state[.]”
The trial court would not let the defendent (his attorney, really) bring this to the attention of the jury, and neither would the trial court. The prosecution argued that the exception to the FOID statute didn't have anything to do with the aggravated unlawful carry statute (even though one of the elements of aggravated unlawful carry is not having a FOID), and the trial and appellate courts bought it. The Illinois supreme court did not.
The actual case is a bit more complex, worth reading I think, and provides an example of why, when stopped, not complicating the officer's life by volunteering unnecessary information might be a good strategy, especially if you are in unfriendly territory.
There is another case from a couple years ago where an Indiana woman was suing the State of Illinois on 2A/Heller grounds because she could not legally have a gun with her while staying at an Illinois friend's house (something she does regularly for business trips, and she has her friend's permission) because the ISP will not issue her an FOID. I do not know yet if that is still in the system, but this may provide a solution to her situation.
UPDATE X 2 (already): I was wrong about the state -- it was an OHIO woman. Interestingly, the state of illinois argued for dismissal of the case because of the clause I cited above -- that people with licenses of from other states CAN have a gun in Illinois. Only problem is, Ohio does not have any licensing scheme. No licenses required to have a gun (good in general) but apparently (she argues) the ohio CCW license does not qualify (?). So she is still out of luck. Therefore the federal court did not grant Illinois' motion for dismissal, and the case is still in federal court.
