Court rules man treated for mental illness can have a gun
Ethics
A Michigan man who can't buy a gun because he was briefly treated for mental health problems in the 1980s has won a key decision from a federal appeals court, which says the burden is on the government to justify a lifetime ban against him.
The Second Amendment case was significant enough for 16 judges on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to participate. Cases usually are heard only by three-judge panels.
Clifford Tyler, 74, of Hillsdale said his constitutional right to bear arms is violated by a federal law that prohibits gun ownership if someone has been admitted to a mental hospital.
In 1985, Tyler's wife ran away with another man, depleted his finances and filed for divorce. He was deeply upset, and his daughters feared he was a danger to himself.
Tyler was ordered to a hospital for at least two weeks. He subsequently recovered, continued working for another two decades and remarried in 1999.
"There is no indication of the continued risk presented by people who were involuntarily committed many years ago and who have no history of intervening mental illness, criminal activity or substance abuse," Judge Julia Smith Gibbons wrote in the lead opinion.
The court on Thursday sent the case back to the federal court in Grand Rapids where the government must argue the merits of a lifetime ban or the risks of Tyler having a gun.
Gibbons suggests Tyler should prevail, based on his years of good mental health.
Related listings
-
LA Supreme Court considers teen robber’s 99-year sentence
Ethics 09/14/2016Louisiana’s Supreme Court is considering whether recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings about juveniles convicted of murder mean a juvenile robber’s 99-year sentence is unconstitutional. Alden Morgan is now 35. He was 17 years old when he held up a couple...
-
Arkansas funeral home pleads guilty over stacked bodies
Ethics 04/23/2016The company that owns an Arkansas funeral home where bodies were found stacked on top of each other in unrefrigerated areas pleaded guilty Friday after felony charges were dropped against the father and son who own the business. Arkansas Funer...
-
Supreme Court will take up case about juror's racial bias
Ethics 04/02/2016The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether jurors' claims of racially charged comments by another juror can overcome the need for secrecy in jury deliberations. The justices will hear an appeal from a Hispanic man in Colorado who says he did n...
CHICAGO BUSINESS & CORPORATE LITIGATION LAWYERS
When faced with a legal challenge, your attorneys should help you identify your goals at the beginning of the process. Thereafter, every action that follows must be undertaken with the aim of meeting those goals. Wasted effort equals wasted time and money, that’s something you cannot afford and your attorneys must respect this concept. At Roth Law Group, we counsel our clients to confront their legal challenges aggressively, but with purpose.
As a former Marine Corps Pilot, I learned that you must assess the situation, determine your mission, construct a plan to achieve the mission and execute that plan. As an attorney and small business owner, I apply the same concepts in taking on my client’s legal challenges. And while it is generally preferable to resolve cases early in the process whenever possible, if you have no choice but to fight, you need someone who is willing to aggressively advocate for you. Here at Roth Law Group, we never back down from a challenge and we fight to win. Let our experienced attorneys put you in control of your legal challenges so you can get back to running your business.