Posted on 05/28/2013 6:19:11 PM PDT by KOZ.
New Jersey: Court Upholds Man Arrested For Visible Gun Case In Car New Jersey appellate court upholds five-year sentence for ex-cop who was driving with his legally owned guns.
Readington TownshipMotorists driving through New Jersey can be subjected to a warrantless search if their luggage is similar in appearance to a gun case, an appellate court ruled last week. The Superior Court's Appellate Division upheld a five year prison sentence against Dustin S. Reininger, a former police officer who was in the process of moving from Maine to Texas when a Readington Township police officer recognized the cases in the back of Reininger's vehicle as the sort that usually carries a rifle.
During the long trip on March 20, 2009, Reininger became tired and decided to pull off the road in an empty, well-lit parking lot. He stopped his green Toyota SUV, turned off his lights, and went to sleep in the driver's seat under a blanket. At 3:25am, Officer Gregory Wester knocked on his window and woke him up, shining a flashlight in his eyes. Officer Wester testified that Reininger appeared "nervous and tired." The policeman asked Reininger whether he was carrying anything illegal.
"No, no, all good," Reininger replied.
Reininger believes he was targeted because of his Texas license plates. Officer Wester then looked inside the SUV with his flashlight noticed two nylon cases in the back seat. Once backup arrived, Officer Wester asked for consent to search the vehicle, but Reininger said no. Officer Wester then opened up the vehicle to search the cases "for safety reasons" any way. Reininger was arrested.
After obtaining a warrant, police recovered fourteen rifles, four shotguns and three handguns, including a loaded Glock. A grand juror had asked the prosecutor whether this man would have been charged if he had used a different case.
"Basically, if someone is moving... from Residence A to Residence B, or transporting, say, for example, they just purchased it, so they can transport it to their home, if they are properly secured, locked in a trunk, locked in a special lockbox and unloaded, then that would most likely provide an exception to these requirements, and therefore a defense to being charged," prosecutor Bennett Barlyn explained.
Reininger's SUV did not have a trunk, and state law only requires the firearm be in a "closed and fastened case" or "securely tied package" while transported. His attorney argued the zippered cases satisfied this requirement.
A jury acquitted him of the charges for possession of the "assault firearms" and handgun possession but convicted him in absentia of illegal possession of hollow-point bullets, shotguns, rifles and a high-capacity magazine. He was apprehended in Texas and extradited to New Jersey.
"What I don't understand is I am a citizen without a criminal history who has served this country not only in the military but as a volunteer to my community and as a police officer, not even making hardly any income at all, and I would have given my life to protect another person and for this country," Reininger said in a statement. "How can I be convicted for exercising my right? When does it become a crime for exercising one's right?"
The three-judge appellate panel insisted New Jersey's gun control laws do not violate the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, citing the Supreme Court's recent Heller decision.
"The Second Amendment does not create 'a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever purpose,'" Judge Ronald B. Graves wrote for the panel. "Furthermore, the Second Amendment does not preclude the state from regulating the manner in which accessories must be transported."
The court also upheld the warrantless search of Reininger's vehicle.
"Based on the outward appearance of the nylon cases, Wester reasonably believed they contained rifles or shotguns that were easily accessible to defendant," Judge Graves wrote. "In our view, however, the warrantless seizure was not necessary for the officers' safety, because defendant had been removed from the vehicle and there were multiple backup officers at the scene. Nevertheless, we conclude the limited seizure was valid under the plain view exception to the search warrant requirement."
A copy of the decision is available in a 170k PDF file at the source link below.
Source: PDF File New Jersey v. Reininger (New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, 5/20/2013)
America had better wake up and provide an answer to that question, else there will be no more America.
"The Second Amendment does not create 'a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever purpose,'" Judge Ronald B. Graves wrote for the panel. "Furthermore, the Second Amendment does not preclude the state from regulating the manner in which accessories must be transported."
This is fatuous reasoning by a Judge that needs to be impeached.
Why PA? You can open carry and CCW is a SHALL issue matter.Also sunsetted the Assault Weapons Ban so you can have all the bells and whistles.Castle Doctrine is also in effect.
tax dollars at work...extraditing this guy...Id imagine all this stuff was completely 'legal' in texas, so why the hell would they even hold him in the first place ???
The three-judge appellate panel insisted New Jersey's gun control laws do not violate the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, citing the Supreme Court's recent Heller decision.
gotta love it when the *conservative* jurist writes the open-ended progressive opinion that undercuts the ruling and the 2A...
a legal beagle/eagle needs to force a re-visit to the miller case...in absentia, of course...
I just read it, this is a very unfortunate case with him moving and just passing through the state.
I had to do similar when I moved to Maryland long ago but I had them hidden away pretty good in my hatchback at the time, and I didnt stay over in any intermediate states like NJ.
My guess is they targeted him because of his Texas plates.
Perhaps he should have had the guns in a SpongeBob backpack?
PA is not to be trusted.
Actually, it’s easy to transport guns in Illinois.
Every Chicago Mayor and their chief says so.
But, seriously, it isn’t hard to transport guns in Illinois and you can even stop and fall asleep.
As I read the rest of the story I realized this particular ex-cop has some issues with basic honesty and the law both in his home state and in NJ.
I believe in Constitutional Carry and hate the criminalization of mere possession of a gun or gun associated item. Yet, this story looks worse and worse. He’s no choirboy.
bkmk
Wormleysburg PA is part of PA ~ not to be trusted. SEE: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3024901/posts
Bullcrap! Something is wrong with this story. Hollow points are certainly legal in NJ and can be purchased at any gun store as well as shotguns and rifles if the buyer carries this firearms registration card.
I own a mini van with no trunk and carry my weapons (unloaded of course) in the back of the van along with a bag full of boxed ammo. --- Never had a problem. I shoot with cops all the time.
“The Second Amendment does not create ‘a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever purpose,’”
Yes it does! These judges are illiterate and criminal.
He needs to keep filing appeals. This is a bull$hit charge.
Just for once in my lifetime, I wish that we would have a governor (or governors) as well as a president, who would be a true, patriotic, pro-American, pro-Christian, anti-muzzlim, anti-gay, fervently anti-socialist in all areas. It would be a refreshing change to have someone on our side in all areas for a change. And whenever some political activist, left-wing, socialist judge would make some dumb-ass ruling, to have the conservative gov or president simply thumb his nose at the ridiculous judicial ruling and to issue a governor or presidential edict that simply declares that judicial ruling to be null & void. And then to sit back and watch the liberal heads popping in rage & frustration. (Come to think of it, I think I described myself as the conservative governor or president... LOL).
Privileges? It’s an Inalienable Right.
His appeal should site the 2nd A, Heller, etc.
What I find most disturbing is the ‘panel’ of ‘judges’:
The three-judge appellate panel insisted New Jersey’s gun control laws do not violate the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, citing the Supreme Court’s recent Heller decision.
“The Second Amendment does not create ‘a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever purpose,’” Judge Ronald B. Graves wrote for the panel. “Furthermore, the Second Amendment does not preclude the state from regulating the manner in which accessories must be transported.”
Ummm, judge dipshit, can you show me WHERE in the Constitution?? I’ll even diagram out the 2nd for you.
“..When does it become a crime for exercising one’s right?” ...”
Whenever there are democrats in control.
“...”The Second Amendment does not create ‘a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever purpose,’” Judge Ronald B. Graves wrote for the panel. “Furthermore, the Second Amendment does not preclude the state from regulating the manner in which accessories must be transported.” ...:”
Clearly, this brain-dead piece of garbage that calls himself a judge isn’t fit to judge a beauty pageant.
“Shall Not Be Infringed” - if being locked up just for TRANSPORTING isn’t infringed, then what is?
“The Second Amendment does not create ‘a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever purpose,’” Judge Ronald B. Graves
What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand, Graves?
I think you have to disassemble them into their constituent parts, loading some parts in your vehicle, while mailing other parts to the destination, and then hauling your ammunition on a sled dragged at least 200 ft behind your vehicle.
The second amendment rights create an immunity from prosecution and punishment. That second amendment right doesn’t create a right to carry a loaded weapon while concealed.
But since New Jersey grants a privilege to carry a loaded weapon concealed to some of its citizens, that privilege must extended to citizens of other states. New Jersey must not demand that, to exercise that privilege, citizens register or take training outside their home state, just as New Jersey citizens are not required to register or take training outside their home state to exercise their privilege of carrying a concealed weapon.
The Constitution does not ‘create’ Rights; only tells what powers gov’t DOES possess.
I see nothing in the 2nd to back up your assertion; let alone, in this case, the weapon was 1) not worn 2) nor concealed, it was stowed for transport.
Does NJ ‘allow’ Citizens to open carry without a ‘license’? If not, then there is no Right. Any other Rights you suggest one needs ‘training’/permission from gov’t to utilize?
Did you read a different article than I did? I didn’t see anything on your list in the article!
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.