Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive :: View topic - Ramsey County

Quote:

Sheriff's investigation, including but not necessarily limited to, and arrest on 11/11/2000 and subsequent conviction for possession of Drug Paraphernalia

a Battery conviction in 2001 has determined that there exists a substantial likelihood that the applicant is a danger to self or others if authorized to carry a pistol under a permit.

Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 624.714, Section 8, subdivision 1(d), a person who has been convicted in Minnesota, or elsewhere, of a Misdemeanor [o]r Gross Misdemeanor level offense of possession of a controlled substance (violation of Chapter 152.), is deemed ineligible to possess a pistol.

joelr wrote:

If Marc's not available, call Jeff Benson, David Gross, or Brian Toder.

ssax wrote:

Ok, another question. So Marc definitely seems to be the man when it comes to getting help with this.

Unfortunately, I don't have the money to spend to do this. I might be able to get the money together for it, but if I lost, I couldn't take that hit, I barely make it paycheck to paycheck.

Do all attorneys that deal with this issue generally cost the same? If so, are there any other options besides the appeal letter? The appeal letter I can afford, but from what it sounds like it won't help me in this situation.

joelr wrote:

Good news: attorneys prices vary. Bad news: of those folks with experience in successful appeals, Marc is on the high end of competence (a position he shares with some other folks), and low end of fees.

ssax wrote:

joelr wrote:

I do agree that is not as much as I thought it would be. If it was a slam dunk, I could see it. But that is why attorneys get paid up front. In case you don't win...

I wonder what the chances of me winning are.

Author:	ssax [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:52 am ]
Post subject:	Ramsey County - DENIED
Well, I was deemed "Danger to self or others". Where do I go from here? The part that scares me is the part where it says I am ineligible to posses a pistol, the local PD issued me the permit to purchase am I going to get in trouble? I was never convicted of possession of a controlled substance, just paraphernalia. Here are the contents of the denial letter: This letter is to inform you that your application for a permit to carry a handgun in the state of Minnesota has been denied pursuant to MN Statue 624.714, subdivision 6, paragraph (a). The denial was based upon the following criteria: Sheriff's investigation, including but not necessarily limited to, and arrest on 11/11/2000 and subsequent conviction for possession of Drug Paraphernalia, a Battery conviction in 2001 has determined that there exists a substantial likelihood that the applicant is a danger to self or others if authorized to carry a pistol under a permit. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 624.714, Section 8, subdivision 1(d), a person who has been convicted in Minnesota, or elsewhere, of a Misdemeanor pr Gross Misdemeanor level offense of possession of a controlled substance (violation of Chapter 152.), is deemed ineligible to possess a pistol.

Author:	princewally [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:56 am ]
Post subject:
A marijuana paraphernalia conviction does not disqualify you. Call an attorney(Marc Berris comes to mind) and ask about appealing the denial. A good letter from an attorney can get the denial tossed, if it's unfounded.

Author:	joelr [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:59 am ]
Post subject:
This is easy: call Marc. Don't talk to anybody else until Marc (who is the reigning expert in handling RamseyCo denials; I think he gets more of them than anybody else) or another attorney tells you to. If Marc's not available, call Jeff Benson, David Gross, or Brian Toder. Subject to the above: please keep us updated.

Author:	mnglocker [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:00 am ]
Post subject:
Heh, ssax just shot me a PM on GT about this, I pretty much summed it up with the same answers. Good Luck, now get on the horn!!!! 612-332-3100

Author:	plblark [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:07 am ]
Post subject:
This one looks like standard Ramsey county double speak Quote: Sheriff's investigation, including but not necessarily limited to, and arrest on 11/11/2000 and subsequent conviction for possession of Drug Paraphernalia a Battery conviction in 2001 has determined that there exists a substantial likelihood that the applicant is a danger to self or others if authorized to carry a pistol under a permit. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 624.714, Section 8, subdivision 1(d), a person who has been convicted in Minnesota, or elsewhere, of a Misdemeanor [o]r Gross Misdemeanor level offense of possession of a controlled substance (violation of Chapter 152.), is deemed ineligible to possess a pistol. One of these things is not like the other ...

Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://ellegon.com/forum/

Ramsey County - DENIED http://ellegon.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12000	Page 1 of 3

Author:	ssax [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:17 am ]
Post subject:
Thank you guys.

Author:	DeanC [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:18 am ]
Post subject:
joelr wrote: If Marc's not available, call Jeff Benson, David Gross, or Brian Toder. I think Brian is on the road today, but somebody from his office (or any of the others) should be able to set up an appointment for you. I don't think any of those guys charges for your initial consultation or phone call.

Author:	Jeff [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:02 pm ]
Post subject:
My understanding is that there is a status conference in that RIAA trial at the end of March. Off topic I know, but the best place to follow the RIAA litigation is here: http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

Author:	bensdad [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:00 pm ]
Post subject:
"battery"? ... as in asault and?

Author:	ssax [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:15 pm ]
Post subject:
Ok, another question. So Marc definitely seems to be the man when it comes to getting help with this. Unfortunately, I don't have the money to spend to do this. I might be able to get the money together for it, but if I lost, I couldn't take that hit, I barely make it paycheck to paycheck. Do all attorneys that deal with this issue generally cost the same? If so, are there any other options besides the appeal letter? The appeal letter I can afford, but from what it sounds like it won't help me in this situation.

Author:	joelr [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:21 pm ]
Post subject:
ssax wrote: Ok, another question. So Marc definitely seems to be the man when it comes to getting help with this. Unfortunately, I don't have the money to spend to do this. I might be able to get the money together for it, but if I lost, I couldn't take that hit, I barely make it paycheck to paycheck. Do all attorneys that deal with this issue generally cost the same? If so, are there any other options besides the appeal letter? The appeal letter I can afford, but from what it sounds like it won't help me in this situation. Good news: attorneys prices vary. Bad news: of those folks with experience in successful appeals, Marc is on the high end of competence (a position he shares with some other folks), and low end of fees.

Author:	ssax [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:27 pm ]
Post subject:
joelr wrote: Good news: attorneys prices vary. Bad news: of those folks with experience in successful appeals, Marc is on the high end of competence (a position he shares with some other folks), and low end of fees. I do agree that is not as much as I thought it would be. If it was a slam dunk, I could see it. But that is why attorneys get paid up front. In case you don't win... I wonder what the chances of me winning are.

Author:	Macx [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:29 pm ]
Post subject:
Your chances improve when you go with a lawyer that is a winner not a whinner. It isn't bad at all to hire a lawyer who comes off as a bit of an a-hole. I have had a gun related lawyer thing going on and found a very nice attorney, better than a year and no movement on the case. I researched and wrangled evidence and handed it to him and he seemed always a day late. The firm split and I went with one of the remaining lawyers, he is abrassive, bordering on rude, I'd say a genuine a-hole . .. and in these three months, it looks like we are finally going to get . .. . . resolution. The right lawyer may cost more up front, but, chances are someone other than the lawyers mentioned above or my own Westrick & Mc Dowall-Nix . . will end up stringing things out and you'll end up paying the same but waiting longer. As Tom Petty said "The waiting is the hardest part". If I had to do over I'd have gone with one of those above. Since my case being moved to Westrick's load, I am happy with them though. Westrick & Mc Dowall-Nix at (651) 292-9603 325 Cedar St # 450 Saint Paul, MN 55101

Author:	Dick Unger [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:34 pm ]
Post subject:
ssax wrote: joelr wrote: Good news: attorneys prices vary. Bad news: of those folks with experience in successful appeals, Marc is on the high end of competence (a position he shares with some other folks), and low end of fees. I do agree that is not as much as I thought it would be. If it was a slam dunk, I could see it. But that is why attorneys get paid up front. In case you don't win... I wonder what the chances of me winning are. Your chances are zero if you don't appeal. Go for it.

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	plblark [ Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:50 pm ]
Post subject:
It's awful easy for me to spend your money but something like ~60% of people denied in Ramsey County don't appeal and thus the RCSO is rewarded for their behavior by the people just going away. Looking at last year's reports, of those who appeal, ~25% get it overturned. I have no idea how your specific case is going to come out and suspect Marc could give you much better advice in that regard. Best of luck whatever you decide to do, Paul