Some of us don't even have that!
Posted on 09/22/2006 12:23:01 PM PDT by neverdem
Associated Press
(LOUISVILLE, Ky.) -- Fadi Mohammad didn't think there was anything wrong with storing a gun in the center console of his car.
He found out differently when he was charged with illegally carrying the weapon during an arrest for drunken driving in Louisville.
When his case went to court, a judge dismissed the charges, saying the center console fell under a provision in Kentucky law allowing guns to be carried in a glove compartment.
But the Kentucky Supreme Court reinstated both charges on Thursday in a split decision issued in Frankfort, saying a center console is not a glove compartment.
"A glove compartment is a small storage cabinet in the dashboard of an automobile," Justice Donald C. Wintersheimer wrote in the opinion.
Mohammad's attorney, Larry Simon of Louisville, did not immediately return calls seeking comment Thursday. Bill Patterson, a spokesman for the Jefferson County Attorney's Office, which prosecuted the case, said he's glad the court clarified the law.
"When it gets to court, it's going to be easier to define if a crime took place," Patterson said.
The opinion, backed by four justices, centered on what constituted a glove compartment and whether the Kentucky General Assembly intended to include other compartments built into the cab of a vehicle when it allowed gun owners to carry weapons inside their vehicles.
Kentucky's concealed weapons law allows someone to carry a gun in the car, either in the glove compartment "regularly installed in a motor vehicle by its manufacturer," on the seat or in the trunk.
Mohammad asked a Jefferson County judge to dismiss the charges, saying the center console between the seats qualified as a glove compartment under the law. The judge agreed and dismissed the charges. The Kentucky Court of Appeals overturned that decision and sent the case to the state Supreme Court.
Wintersheimer wrote that the General Assembly didn't include all manufactured-installed compartments in the car, which means they must have meant to include only the glove compartment in the exception.
"Whether gloves fit into other compartments is immaterial because the phrase 'glove compartment' was expressly adopted by the General Assembly and retains the plain meaning as a compartment located in the dashboard of a vehicle," Wintersheimer wrote.
In a separate opinion, Justice Will T. Scott said the majority opinion refers to a compartment that always has a "locking mechanism," a requirement not listed in the General Assembly's definition of glove compartment.
"Moreover, there is nothing in the statute that requires it to be in the 'dash board,' much less on the 'face' of the dash board, as is commonly assumed," Scott wrote in an opinion joined by Chief Justice Joseph Lambert.
Scott also noted that several newer vehicles do not have glove compartments as defined by the majority of the court.
The legislature should amend the law to correct the court's ruling, because the Supreme Court cannot amend the law on its own, Scott wrote.
"That's all the better reason to reinsert 'console compartment, or some other similar compartment' back into the statute," Scott wrote. "But, that of course is not for us to do."
Indeed. The idea was to make carjacking a less hazardous occupation.
No kidding. This being a criminal statute, vagueness is supposed to be construed in favor of the defendant. The judge should have let the guy off and then requested clarification from the legislature. That's how we do it down here in Louisiana, anyway.
If a gun is allowed on a car seat, it is hard to imagine the gun in the center compartment as being more problematic. The concealed nature is of concern, but so would be the concealed nature of the 'glove box'.
I don't see a compelling cause here. What is unclear is if the person actually had a concealed weapons permit. Since we are addressing the issue of whether the console is a glove box, it's seems they are trying to define what the permit allows. That would imply he did have one.
It seems like a pretty strident attempt to enforce a rule rather than determine intent. I realize intent isn't a valid determinant, but this is a little over the top IMPO.
He was charge with driving while inebriated. That seems appropriate.
I think he was pulled over for, and charged with, DWI.
I'll grant that the wording of the law failed to take into account vehicles without traditional a 'glove compartment.' At least they didn't engage in activist nonsense. IMHO, the fault lies with the drafting of the legislation.
And the dumb@ss gave the police permission to search his car?
Interpreting the law as it's written is precisely what judges do. Nit picking is important.
Besides, unpicked nits become lice. :-)
I dunno. He was drunk.
Can you imagine being the person to go to jail because you stored your weapon a foot and a half from where it is legal to store...
I was going to ask why it mattered as long as the gun was in a compartment to keep it from flying around the car. But then I read that having it on the seat of the car was okay. That doesn't make sense to me. It's okay to be laying on the seat but not in the center console? Strange.
Your kidding right?
The black robed idiots are splitting hairs here.
I have never, once in my life put gloves in the glove compartment.
My van does not have a glove compartment nor a center console. It does have a small compartment on the engine cover and also large door pockets.
"Kentucky's concealed weapons law allows someone to carry a gun in the car, either in the glove compartment "regularly installed in a motor vehicle by its manufacturer," on the seat or in the trunk. "
"That's all the better reason to reinsert 'console compartment, or some other similar compartment' back into the statute," Scott wrote. "But, that of course is not for us to do."If the statute used to be written that way, but "console compartment, or some other similar compartment" was at some point removed from the wording then that is evidence that the legislature decided that a console compartment was not to be considered as a place for storing a weapon since they explicitly removed language saying just that from the law.
Back in thirty to sixty.
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.