Getting a LTCH after non violent misdemeanor

[DeMarco]

I will start from the beginning as lots of info is often helpful. This recount is how it was told to me from my mother. My cousin and my brother were driving somewhere and were stopped for not wearing seat belts, and my cousin announced he was carrying. The officer searched him and my brother. My brother had a pistol in his boot and was charged with carrying without a permit. He is currently serving 90 days. He would have been on house arrest but could not afford the cost. My question is has anyone had experience or has knowledge of still getting a LTCH. He mentioned when I visited him that it is a nonviolent misdemeanor, which through research is either class B or C. I am not sure though. While I know some will chime in about how my cousin shouldn't have said anything, or they should have worn seat belts, or they should have said they were transporting it. None of that matters at this point. He will be done serving his time and that is that. So please keep comments on point. Can he still get a LTCH after a Class (B or C ?) non-violent misdemeanor. Thanks for your help in advance.

 

[Doty]

It sounds like he has no chance of getting LTCH. You can't get charged with carrying without a permit and get a permit.

 

[Spanky46151]

Stick a fork in him.

 

[canav844]

For the full code go here: http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar47/ch2.html but here are some selections that apply to your story and the approval/disapproval process.

IC 35-47-2-1
Carrying a handgun without a license or by a person convicted of domestic battery; exceptions
Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) and section 2 of this chapter, a person shall not carry a handgun in any vehicle or on or about the person's body without being licensed under this chapter to carry a handgun.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (c), a person may carry a handgun without being licensed under this chapter to carry a handgun if:

(c) The officer to whom the application is made shall ascertain the applicant's name, full address, length of residence in the community, whether the applicant's residence is located within the limits of any city or town, the applicant's occupation, place of business or employment, criminal record, if any, and convictions (minor traffic offenses excepted), age, race, sex, nationality, date of birth, citizenship, height, weight, build, color of hair, color of eyes, scars and marks, whether the applicant has previously held an Indiana license to carry a handgun and, if so, the serial number of the license and year issued, whether the applicant's license has ever been suspended or revoked, and if so, the year and reason for the suspension or revocation, and the applicant's reason for desiring a license. The officer to whom the application is made shall conduct an investigation into the applicant's official records and verify thereby the applicant's character and reputation, and shall in addition verify for accuracy the information contained in the application, and shall forward this information together with the officer's recommendation for approval or disapproval and one (1) set of legible and classifiable fingerprints of the applicant to the superintendent.

(d) The superintendent may make whatever further investigation the superintendent deems necessary. Whenever disapproval is recommended, the officer to whom the application is made shall provide the superintendent and the applicant with the officer's complete and specific reasons, in writing, for the recommendation of disapproval.
(e) If it appears to the superintendent that the applicant:
(1) has a proper reason for carrying a handgun;
(2) is of good character and reputation;
(3) is a proper person to be licensed; and
(4) is:
(A) a citizen of the United States; or
(B) not a citizen of the United States but is allowed to carry a firearm in the United States under federal law;
the superintendent shall issue to the applicant a qualified or an unlimited license to carry any handgun lawfully possessed by the applicant. The original license shall be delivered to the licensee. A copy shall be delivered to the officer to whom the application for license was made. A copy shall be retained by the superintendent for at least four (4) years in the case of a four (4) year license. The superintendent may adopt guidelines to establish a records retention policy for a lifetime license. A four (4) year license shall be valid for a period of four (4) years from the date of issue. A lifetime license is valid for the life of the individual receiving the license. The license of police officers, sheriffs or their deputies, and law enforcement officers of the United States government who have been honorably retired by a lawfully created pension board or its equivalent after twenty (20) or more years of service, shall be valid for the life of these individuals. However, a lifetime license is automatically revoked if the license holder does not remain a proper person.

(g) A license to carry a handgun shall not be issued to any person who:
(1) has been convicted of a felony;
(2) has had a license to carry a handgun suspended, unless the person's license has been reinstated;
(3) is under eighteen (18) years of age;
(4) is under twenty-three (23) years of age if the person has been adjudicated a delinquent child for an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult; or
(5) has been arrested for a Class A or Class B felony, or any other felony that was committed while armed with a deadly weapon or that involved the use of violence, if a court has found probable cause to believe that the person committed the offense charged.

In the case of an arrest under subdivision (5), a license to carry a handgun may be issued to a person who has been acquitted of the specific offense charged or if the charges for the specific offense are dismissed. The superintendent shall prescribe all forms to be used in connection with the administration of this chapter.


IC 35-47-2-23
Violations; classes of misdemeanors and felonies
Sec. 23. (a) A person who violates section 3, 4, 5, 14, 15, or 16 of this chapter commits a Class B misdemeanor.
(b) A person who violates section 7, 17, or 18 of this chapter commits a Class C felony.
(c) A person who violates section 1 of this chapter commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class C felony:
(1) if the offense is committed:
(A) on or in school property;
(B) within one thousand (1,000) feet of school property; or
(C) on a school bus; or
(2) if the person:
(A) has a prior conviction of any offense under:
(i) this subsection; or (ii) subsection (d); or
(B) has been convicted of a felony within fifteen (15) years before the date of the offense.
(d) A person who violates section 22 of this chapter commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has a prior conviction of any offense under this subsection or subsection (c), or if the person has been convicted of a felony within fifteen (15) years before the date of the offense.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32. Amended by P.L.16-1984, SEC.20; P.L.140-1994, SEC.9; P.L.17-1997, SEC.7.

Section 1 is the carrying without a license, there's more details to the exceptions but as he already has a conviction, it doesn't really matter; it's an A misdemeanor unless one of those conditions is met, and as he's only serving 90days, I'm inclined to believe that it's just the misdemeanor.

 

[DeMarco]

I read through the law, which is what led me to think he got a class B or C. The thing is the way I read it, it tells you what happens if you carry without a permit, but I noted that only a felony automatically disqualifies you. Correct me if I misread or missed something.

 

[figley]

You're going to get your best information by contacting the Indiana State Police, and asking them directly, since they are the issuing authority.

He could also go ahead and apply for one, and see what happens.

Either way, he needs to be as forthcoming and transparent as possible about his criminal history. ISP can determine his legal situation, and make an objective decision. However, if he's dishonest, they will find out, and he will definitely be disqualified. I don't know if it's official or not, but that omission, in my opinion, would be a disqualifying infraction of moral terpitude.

 

[DeMarco]

@figley I did just that and the commanding officer there said that it is still possible, though my brother might have to wait a certain amount of time. He noted that it being a misdemeanor and not a felony is an important factor. Thanks for all of your responses

DeMarco

 

[Titanium_Frost]

@figley I did just that and the commanding officer there said that it is still possible, though my brother might have to wait a certain amount of time. He noted that it being a misdemeanor and not a felony is an important factor. Thanks for all of your responses

DeMarco

Now that you have your answer can we go off topic and use this as an example? I think a lot of good lessons can be learned from this and if you are game and could relay us some more facts about the case we would not have to use as much speculation.

Please note I am not trying or attempting to bash any of the parties involved and from what you wrote it is ridiculous that he actually served time in jail for carrying a handgun.

Thanks,
Ben

 

[Fargo]

@figley I did just that and the commanding officer there said that it is still possible, though my brother might have to wait a certain amount of time. He noted that it being a misdemeanor and not a felony is an important factor. Thanks for all of your responses

DeMarco

The reason he has to wait 5 years is because he is no longer a "proper person" under:

IC 35-47-1-7
"Proper person"
Sec. 7. "Proper person" means a person who:
(1) does not have a conviction for resisting law enforcement under IC 35-44-3-3 within five (5) years before the person applies for a license or permit under this chapter;
(2) does not have a conviction for a crime for which the person could have been sentenced for more than one (1) year;
(3) does not have a conviction for a crime of domestic violence (as defined in IC 35-41-1-6.3), unless a court has restored the person's right to possess a firearm under IC 35-47-4-7;
(4) is not prohibited by a court order from possessing a handgun;

(5) does not have a record of being an alcohol or drug abuser as defined in this chapter;
(6) does not have documented evidence which would give rise to a reasonable belief that the person has a propensity for violent or emotionally unstable conduct;
(7) does not make a false statement of material fact on the person's application;
(8) does not have a conviction for any crime involving an inability to safely handle a handgun;
(9) does not have a conviction for violation of the provisions of this article within five (5) years of the person's application;
(10) does not have an adjudication as a delinquent child for an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, if the person applying for a license or permit under this chapter is less than twenty-three (23) years of age;
(11) has not been involuntarily committed, other than a temporary commitment for observation or evaluation, to a mental institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority;
(12) has not been the subject of a:
(A) ninety (90) day commitment as a result of proceeding under IC 12-26-6; or
(B) regular commitment under IC 12-26-7; or
(13) has not been found by a court to be mentally incompetent, including being found:
(A) not guilty by reason of insanity;
(B) guilty but mentally ill; or
(C) incompetent to stand trial.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.32. Amended by P.L.191-1984, SEC.1; P.L.148-1987, SEC.3; P.L.269-1995, SEC.5; P.L.49-2005, SEC.1; P.L.118-2007, SEC.34; P.L.127-2011, SEC.3.
IC 35-47-1-8

He is not a "proper person" because he now has an article 47 conviction for handgun without a license within the last 5 years. IC 35-47-2-3(e)(3) requires an applicant to be a proper person.

Best,

Joe

 

[Blackduck21]

He is now willing to pay the nominal amount to carry? Huh?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Now that you have your answer can we go off topic and use this as an example? I think a lot of good lessons can be learned from this and if you are game and could relay us some more facts about the case we would not have to use as much speculation.

Please note I am not trying or attempting to bash any of the parties involved and from what you wrote it is ridiculous that he actually served time in jail for carrying a handgun.

Thanks,
Ben

Carrying a handgun without a license is a Class A misdemeanor if I read IC correctly and a person may not be jailed for more than a year

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Carrying a handgun without a license is a Class A misdemeanor if I read IC correctly and a person may not be jailed for more than a year

You are quite correct and that is the letter of the law. However I think it is SHARPLY unconstitutional to make it a CRIME to bear certain arms because of their size without "approval" from the government.

It used to be that cops would (at their discretion) issue a warning citation and instruct them how to be compliant with the law. Now we have heard about police nation wide cracking down on whatever firearm laws exist in the land. It is time for National Constitutional Carry NOW.

 

[DeMarco]

Didn't see that it is 5 years but that is better than never and it is not like he can't transport the fire ARM in a case to and from the gun range. Assuming the proper person limitation applies to the application for ltch. He went to jail as a last resort due to the high cost of house arrest and his current living arrangement. You have to be ready for "visits" at any time and that wasn't going to fly. I didnt find out until it was too late to help him get and attorney so he faced the judge alone. I suspect a good lawyer would have got him off clean. Maybe... But as I mentioned he will be done quite soon 3 wks and then its back to regular life.

 

[cobber]

He is now willing to pay the nominal amount to carry? Huh?

A lifetime LTCH would have been far cheaper than 90 days on House Arrest. Hindsight being what it is...

 

[Hammerhead]

You are quite correct and that is the letter of the law. However I think it is SHARPLY unconstitutional to make it a CRIME to bear certain arms because of their size without "approval" from the government.

It used to be that cops would (at their discretion) issue a warning citation and instruct them how to be compliant with the law. Now we have heard about police nation wide cracking down on whatever firearm laws exist in the land. It is time for National Constitutional Carry NOW.

You mean you want the 2A to be recognized for what it's supposed to be?!?

 

[mtgasten]

You mean you want the 2A to be recognized for what it's supposed to be?!?

yessir!

 

[CarmelHP]

@figley I did just that and the commanding officer there said that it is still possible, though my brother might have to wait a certain amount of time.

Sec. 7. (9) does not have a conviction for violation of the provisions of this article within five (5) years of the person's application;

Edit. Now I see Fargo beat me to it.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

A lifetime LTCH would have been far cheaper than 90 days on House Arrest. Hindsight being what it is...

But, but sitting down and filling out the application may take 10 minutes.

 

[Fargo]

A lifetime LTCH would have been far cheaper than 90 days on House Arrest. Hindsight being what it is...

A 90 day executed sentence usually means that this happened in Marion Co. Last I checked, the Marion Co. prosecutor's office has one of those asinine "zero tolerance" policies where they demand executed time off any handgun charge to help with their PR bull****. While there certainly are cases that deserve that, there are also quite a few that do not.

Many counties, including the one that I live in, give diversion on the A Misdemeanor cases, contingent upon you getting your license, as long as you have a clean record and don't appear to have been up to no good. One such case that I ran across was a guy coming home from helping teach hunter's safety who didn't have it properly stored. In Indy, they would have likely offered him jail time.

Just another reason I no longer live in Marion Co.

Joe

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Last I checked, the Marion Co. prosecutor's office has one of those asinine "zero tolerance" policies where they demand executed time off any handgun charge to help with their PR bull****.

This policy is . . . rigidly flexible.