The US Supreme Court has denied Pennsylvania's cert petition in Pennsylvania v Hicks

JRT

NES Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
3,723
Likes
5,581
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Feedback: 9 / 0 / 0
In short, the Commonwealth Supreme Court ruled that openly carrying a gun or carrying concealed is not a reasonable suspicion of a crime. Pennsylvania felt the ruling was too broad and took it to the US Supreme Court where their motion was DENIED. If your curious about the ruling in the commonwealth Prince Law summarizes it nicely here,


From the decision, this paragraph will bring a smile to your face,

"Crime and violence are ever-present threats in society, and it can be tempting to look to the government to provide protection from “dangerous” people with constant vigilance. However, the protections of the Fourth Amendment remain an essential bulwark against the overreaches and abuses of governmental authority over all individuals. Notwithstanding the dangers posed by the few, we must remain wary of the diminution of the core liberties that define our republic, even when the curtailment of individual liberty appears to serve an interest as paramount as public safety."

Edited to add the ruling,


Maybe this means the US Supreme Court will take more 2a cases. I understand that this is a 4th ruling but it has some 2nd mixed in.
 
Last edited:
In short, the Commonwealth Supreme Court ruled that openly carrying a gun or carrying concealed is not a reasonable suspicion of a crime. Pennsylvania felt the ruling was too broad and took it to the US Supreme Court where their motion was DENIED. If your curious about the ruling in the commonwealth Prince Law summarizes it nicely here,


From the decision, this paragraph will bring a smile to your face,

"Crime and violence are ever-present threats in society, and it can be tempting to look to the government to provide protection from “dangerous” people with constant vigilance. However, the protections of the Fourth Amendment remain an essential bulwark against the overreaches and abuses of governmental authority over all individuals. Notwithstanding the dangers posed by the few, we must remain wary of the diminution of the core liberties that define our republic, even when the curtailment of individual liberty appears to serve an interest as paramount as public safety."

Edited to add the ruling,


Maybe this means the US Supreme Court will take more 2a cases. I understand that this is a 4th ruling but it has some 2nd mixed in.

In today's society, GOVERNMENT on every level is the biggest and most dangerous criminal in our midst....bar none.
 
"According to the suppression court’s factual recitation, the “camera operator advised officers that the [observed individual] showed the firearm to another patron, put the firearm in his waistband, covered it with his shirt, and walked inside” the convenience store."

Footnote: "Although the suppression court found that the police officers received information that Hicks “showed” the firearm to the other patron, the officer who testified at the suppression hearing repeatedly stated that the dispatch advised officers that the suspect was “brandishing” a firearm—a term with a distinct connotation."

"While responding police officers were en route, Hicks entered and exited the convenience store, then reentered his vehicle. Before Hicks could exit the parking lot,
numerous police officers in marked vehicles intercepted and stopped Hicks’ vehicle. Believing that Hicks had moved his hands around inside the vehicle, Officer Ryan Alles
drew his service weapon as he approached Hicks’ vehicle and ordered Hicks to keep his hands up."


Yeah, responding to a "man with a gun" at a Stop-n-Rob call at 230am, I'm sure the officers were a bit tense. Presumably "believing that Hicks had moved his hands around in side the car" was a soft way to say they couldn't tell whether he had his hands atop the steering wheel or was reaching for a gun - I'd guess they just drew down on him without any other consideration.

The missing bit was the commission of a crime, or lack thereof. Granted entering a convenience store at 230am with a concealed handgun and *not* robbing it was suspicious, but that doesn't reach the level to cuff and stuff an armed citizen.

A good reminder to keep a concealed handgun concealed. Show off your carry piece to your buddies in private. A simple "I'm strapped" whisper with accompanying tug at the crotch gesture should suffice in public.
 
Last edited:
"According to the suppression court’s factual recitation, the “camera operator advised officers that the [observed individual] showed the firearm to another patron, put the firearm in his waistband, covered it with his shirt, and walked inside” the convenience store."

Footnote: "Although the suppression court found that the police officers received information that Hicks “showed” the firearm to the other patron, the officer who testified at the suppression hearing repeatedly stated that the dispatch advised officers that the suspect was “brandishing” a firearm—a term with a distinct connotation."

"While responding police officers were en route, Hicks entered and exited the convenience store, then reentered his vehicle. Before Hicks could exit the parking lot,
numerous police officers in marked vehicles intercepted and stopped Hicks’ vehicle. Believing that Hicks had moved his hands around inside the vehicle, Officer Ryan Alles
drew his service weapon as he approached Hicks’ vehicle and ordered Hicks to keep his hands up."


Yeah, responding to a "man with a gun" at a Stop-n-Rob call at 230am, I'm sure the officers were a bit tense. Presumably "believing that Hicks had moved his hands around in side the car" was a soft way to say they couldn't tell whether he had his hands atop the steering wheel or was reaching for a gun - I'd guess they just drew don on him without any other consideration.

The missing bit was the commission of a crime, or lack thereof. Granted entering a convenience store at 230am with a concealed handgun and *not* robbing it was suspicious, but that doesn't reach the level to cuff and stuff an armed citizen.

A good reminder to keep a concealed handgun concealed. Show off your carry piece to your buddies in private. A simple "I'm strapped" whisper with accompanying tug at the crotch gesture should suffice in public.

The Important message is wether concealed, open carrying or showing your buddy your chrome four fifths you should not have to tell the police a f***ing word. Stupidity shouldn’t equal explaining yourself to a cop.
 
It may come as a surprise to some, but the Massachusetts SJC rendered a similar opinion a few years ago.
 
Do you see a lot of open carry in Massachusetts? If you can’t be questioned you should exercise that right.

I used to see a guy walking between northeastern and longwood with a polished 1911 OWB with nothing but an open brown leather jacket over it- does that count?
 
While the ruling sounds great, the concurring opinions recount that it is an exception to prevailing jurisprudence as, in most but not all states, a CCW Permit is an Affirmative Defense to the criminal act of carry a gun concealed. Meaning, the cops can detain you for suspicion of concealed carry with your CCW Permit the reason why it's not a criminal act. The cops can let you walk or haul you in, with the prosecutor/judge then responsible for assessing your Affirmative Defense via due process. In this way, carrying a handgun is prohibited, but you have an exception to the prohibition (a CCW permit). This is opposed to carrying a gun being a right, unless you are otherwise prohibited by law. IANAL but that's my read.

I think the 53-page opinion is a great read and I'm convinced it's the *other* states that got it wrong in using an "elements vs affirmative defense" test. Just like Kavanaugh argued elsewhere, the 2ndA isn't a matter of a "strict vs intermediate scrutiny" test - it's a right by text and intent. The majority in PA v Hicks held there should be no test - it's a 4thA right to be free from stop and frisk if there is no individualized, specific suspicion of a criminal act.

They argue that state cannot require people to get a CCW Permit, then subject people to state detainment to assess whether they had a CCW Permit. In that twisted way, to exercise your 2ndA rights, the state would require you to relinquish your 4thA rights.

The opinion details the audio/video evidence - Hicks never "showed his gun" or removed/replaced his gun from his waistband. He was just seen shifting garments in his car and while walking with brief reveals of his gun to the camera. The prosecution made it sound like he was checking his piece before going in to rob the place. Total BS.
 
"According to the suppression court’s factual recitation, the “camera operator advised officers that the [observed individual] showed the firearm to another patron, put the firearm in his waistband, covered it with his shirt, and walked inside” the convenience store."

Footnote: "Although the suppression court found that the police officers received information that Hicks “showed” the firearm to the other patron, the officer who testified at the suppression hearing repeatedly stated that the dispatch advised officers that the suspect was “brandishing” a firearm—a term with a distinct connotation."

"While responding police officers were en route, Hicks entered and exited the convenience store, then reentered his vehicle. Before Hicks could exit the parking lot,
numerous police officers in marked vehicles intercepted and stopped Hicks’ vehicle. Believing that Hicks had moved his hands around inside the vehicle, Officer Ryan Alles
drew his service weapon as he approached Hicks’ vehicle and ordered Hicks to keep his hands up."


Yeah, responding to a "man with a gun" at a Stop-n-Rob call at 230am, I'm sure the officers were a bit tense. Presumably "believing that Hicks had moved his hands around in side the car" was a soft way to say they couldn't tell whether he had his hands atop the steering wheel or was reaching for a gun - I'd guess they just drew down on him without any other consideration.

The missing bit was the commission of a crime, or lack thereof. Granted entering a convenience store at 230am with a concealed handgun and *not* robbing it was suspicious, but that doesn't reach the level to cuff and stuff an armed citizen.

A good reminder to keep a concealed handgun concealed. Show off your carry piece to your buddies in private. A simple "I'm strapped" whisper with accompanying tug at the crotch gesture should suffice in public.
It is good advice but it shouldn't be necessary due to presumtion of innocence and all that. Hopefully some day it wont. This is great textural support of the intent of the founders and the Constitution. Hopefully there will be many more such decisions.
 
Back
Top Bottom