[MileHi]

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed, observing that no evidence had been offered to show that such shotguns had a reasonable relation to a well-regulated militia. "[W]e cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument," wrote the high court in Miller. "Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

Yet another author fails to note that no one showed up to argue Millers side, that is why the court couldn't say that a short shotgun could be a militia weapon. I think that is important info.

[supercat]

Yet another author fails to note that no one showed up to argue Millers side, that is why the court couldn't say that a short shotgun could be a militia weapon. I think that is important info.

Even more important is the fact that neither Miller nor co-defendant Layton was ever convicted on the short-barreled shotgun charges! Miller happened to be dead at the time, but the government offered Layton a plea-bargain for "time served" rather than go to court. Had the government gone to court, Layton would have been allowed to produce evidence that sawed-off shotguns are militarily useful, and if a jury found that they were (likely, given that Layton could show that such weapons were used in World War I) the jury would have had to acquit.

Can anyone think of any other case where the government has claimed to have "won" a case it plea-bargained for time-served?