Posted on 12/07/2004 5:39:53 AM PST by Born Conservative
WILKES-BARRE - A Sugarloaf Township man's 7-year battle to regain his right to carry a concealed weapon suffered a major setback Monday when the state's Commonwealth Court reversed a ruling that granted him the permit. The decision is the latest in a long, complex legal battle Michael S. Pecora has waged with the Pennsylvania State Police and the Luzerne County Sheriff's Office.
Pecora had held a concealed weapons permit for about 35 years, but the sheriff's office denied him renewal in 1996 after a state police records check showed Pecora pleaded no contest in 1978 to federal income tax evasion.
The problem: In 1996 the state's Uniform Firearms Act was amended to prohibit persons convicted of crimes punishable by more than one year from owning a firearm. At the time of Pecora's plea, the sentence for tax evasion fit that criteria.
The controversial amendment has led to several court challenges because it resulted in some people convicted of relatively minor, non-violent crimes being permanently banned from owning firearms. Pecora and other plaintiffs have maintained the law unfairly penalizes them because it is being applied retroactively.
Pecora twice took his case to Luzerne County Court, arguing his conviction dealt with a crime involving business, therefore it fell under an exception within the Firearms Act. Two county judges ruled in his favor, once in 1998 and again in 2003, but state police persisted in their appeals and the case landed before Commonwealth Court in September.
The latest appeal before Commonwealth Court was unusual in that Pecora's attorney, Anthony Lucadamo of Hazleton, conceded the Firearms Act precludes Pecora from owning a firearm. That would make the issuance of a concealed weapons permit a moot point, but Lucadamo said on Monday that Pecora persisted with the appeal out of principle.
"He had the license to carry a firearm for many years. He felt strongly it should not be taken away from him," Lucadamo said. "It was principle for him from day one. He knew there was no practical way he could carry a firearm."
Lucadamo tried to distinguish the issue of the gun permit from the ownership issue, saying the Firearms Act prohibition dealt only with ownership.
The Commonwealth Court rejected the argument, noting such a distinction would lead to an "absurd result" that a person could be prohibited from owning a gun, yet be entitled to hold a concealed weapons permit.
Lucadamo said he does not know if Pecora will appeal the case further. He could ask the state Supreme Court to hear the case, but the high court hears only a limited number of cases each year, so there is no guarantee it would consider the appeal.
You're right it sucks. My understanding is, failing an appeal, he can always get a pardon. That will allow him to CCW carry again.
You can't own a gun because of this, you can't own a gun because of that, the govt is slowly restricting firearm ownership to the few that have $$$.
Yes, he can get a pardon, if he has enough $$$.
Pecora should have paid more attention to his individual constitutional rights. America's Constitution clearly states that "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of a person to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed" unless that person has been convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year.
They aren't easy to come by unless your brother is President - Slick Willie pardoned his brother for drug crimes.
Mornin' all,
Not wanting to start a vanity thread, I wonder if I could impose upon y'all for a bit of advice. I'm looking for a handgun to give my husband for Christmas, preferably some new, exotic caliber. Last year I gave him the S&W 500 and the year before a Ruger 480. He already owns most calibers and styles, too many for me to know what they all are. Hence the need for a new caliber or newly released gun. Any suggestions? Thanks.
Your husband is one lucky, lucky, LUCKY man!
How about a VERY high end 1911 .45? Check out Les Baer or Rock River Arms. They run up to $3000. If you get him one of those and he doesn't sweep you off your feet, well, call me!
What ever happened to Ex Post Facto?
Every one over looks the most important Constitutional issue.
How can anyone be twice punished for the same crime?
The Constitution provides a protection against "double jeopardy" yet, the Government simply decides that if you are convicted and punished for a crime, then you will again be punished by being denied your constitutional right to possess, carry, and use a firearm.
The reason more attorney's do not argue this issue, is because the Bar Association supports and actively participates in "gun control" and the elimination of guns from Americans possession.
Federal law 18 USC section 922(g) does the same (and includes ammunition).
and Les Baer is sure proud of them. I should have qualified my post - if I can get away with spending a $1000, I'd be happy as our two children would like something under the tree as well. ;-) I'm not completely ruling it out, like I said, that's good looking.
Not mentioned here, but equally relevant in PA is a new provision that rescinds the right to own firearms if a PFA (Protection from Abuse) order is issued. This requires no conviction, trial, or jury; just someone (not even spouse or family anymore) to complain that they feel 'threatened' by you. I know firsthand of a guy who had to sell off a very large gun collection that looks like he was set up and hustled by someone who wanted some of his guns.
If the Liberals get their way, anybody with a parking ticket would be prohibited from carrying a firearm.
I am holding out for one of these this year: 
Everyone "needs" .50 cal
Get him a Springfield arms M1A. There are a few submodels but I recently purchased the Scout. Very nice - even though it isnt a handgun. Rifles are far more fun to shoot than pistols anyway.
I feel sorry for the guy, but there is a moral to this story, : DONT BREAK THE LAW, INCLUDING TAX LAWS.
In California some penal codes are known as "wobblers." There are cases that could be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony. If you were convicted of a felony and your case was a "wobbler" you could petition the court to have it reduced to a misdemeanor and dismissed. Of course some felonies in California create a 10 year ban on firearems ownership, while others (spousal abuse) create a lifetime ban under federal law. The only other route to rehibilitate your record is a pardon.
This guys problem is he was convicted in FEDERAL court. As far as I know there is no route to restore his 2nd Amendment rights at the federal level other then a pardon from the President.
I thought removing the guns from your immediate control was enough in this kind of circumstance. Let your county sherriff or brother-in-law lock them up in a safe to which you have no direct access, until the order is rescinded. They can't keep these orders forever.
-ccm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.