Top 5 Court Cases every carrier should know

[foszoe]

I read various threads talking about Terry and Johnson and yada yada well, what 5 court cases define rights for me in the state of indiana in regards to carrying should I be the most familiar with and if you have the time to address the why question feel free to do that also?

 

[Rookie]

Washington
Richardson
Starr

 

[cobber]

Kirk has them on the tip of his tongue. He'll be here shortly.

 

[foszoe]

Thanks I am more than willing to do my homework and come back with questions I just want a consenus on what the top 5 or so would be.

 

[iChokePeople]

California v. White (Dan White)

 

[Somemedic]

Waiting.. ready to make more notes to my phone in case of bad traffic stop.

 

[CathyInBlue]

I couldn't narrow it down to just 5. And if I looked harder, there are more state cases that should be known. A top 10 list would be better.

(Melvin) Washington v State, 49A02-0907-CR-649 (2010)
http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03041001jsk.pdf
The police may not search and unoccupied vehicle for a firearm without a warrant or RABCOS, when owner possesses a valid LTCH.

(Robert) Richardson v State, 49S02-0910-CR-428 (2010)
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06031001fsj.pdf
Production of a valid LTCH terminates all questioning vis-a-vis firearms possession.

(Jeron) Johnson v State, 71S03-0009-CR-529 (2001)
Converted file rdr
Fighting words + display of a firearm = threat/intimidation

(James) Malone v State, 49A02-0701-CR-18 (2008)
http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03200808jsk.pdf
The police may not seize a firearm from a person standing on their own front porch without a warrant, RABCOS, or RAS.

(Ken) Gunn v State, 49A02-1102-CR-82 (2011)
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/10241103pss.pdf
The law is what it is. It is unreasonable for the police to apply their own misunderstanding of it as if it were law.

(Adam) Starr v State, 49A04-0912-CR-677 (2010)
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06221001lmb.pdf
You are only required to ID yourself if you are suspected of an infraction or violation, period.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Kirk has them on the tip of his tongue. He'll be here shortly

YET AGAIN I am falsely accused. YET AGAIN The Man has me down.

Now you see the violence inherent in the system!

what 5 court cases define rights for me in the state of indiana in regards to carrying should I be the most familiar with

In what context? Carrying rights? No go zones? Stops? Vehicle stops? Criminal convictions? Applying for a carry license? Prohibiting rhino from dancing while armed?

 

[Rookie]

YET AGAIN I am falsely accused. YET AGAIN The Man has me down.

Now you see the violence inherent in the system!



In what context?

I KNEW IT! Man, I should have written my prediction down.

 

[Rookie]

what 5 court cases define rights for me in the state of indiana in regards to carrying should I be the most familiar with inter alia, blaise, blaise, etcetera, infinite ad nauseum

How about now?

 

[foszoe]

YET AGAIN I am falsely accused. YET AGAIN The Man has me down.

Now you see the violence inherent in the system!



In what context? Carrying rights? No go zones? Stops? Vehicle stops? Criminal convictions? Applying for a carry license? Prohibiting rhino from dancing while armed?

Wow hmmm...

I have the LTCH already and usually carry concealed, but have carried openly (still makes me feel "dirty" when I do meaning conspicuous or self conscious) so...

Vehicle stops would concern me. Walking around and getting questioned.
Its one of those subjects I find overwhelming so I don't know where to begin so you ask me where to begin

I don't want to end up in a situation where they are taking my gun and running numbers on it when they have no justification for doing so.

I would like to know my rights and exercise them without pressing it so much I get detained for a long time.

I am signed up to take Guys class one of these days but want to show up better "armed" to ask intelligent questions so I can get the most for my money.

 

[foszoe]

I couldn't narrow it down to just 5. And if I looked harder, there are more state cases that should be known. A top 10 list would be better.

(Melvin) Washington v State, 49A02-0907-CR-649 (2010)
http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03041001jsk.pdf
The police may not search and unoccupied vehicle for a firearm without a warrant or RABCOS, when owner possesses a valid LTCH.

(Robert) Richardson v State, 49S02-0910-CR-428 (2010)
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06031001fsj.pdf
Production of a valid LTCH terminates all questioning vis-a-vis firearms possession.

(Jeron) Johnson v State, 71S03-0009-CR-529 (2001)
Converted file rdr
Fighting words + display of a firearm = threat/intimidation

(James) Malone v State, 49A02-0701-CR-18 (2008)
http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03200808jsk.pdf
The police may not seize a firearm from a person standing on their own front porch without a warrant, RABCOS, or RAS.

(Ken) Gunn v State, 49A02-1102-CR-82 (2011)
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/10241103pss.pdf
The law is what it is. It is unreasonable for the police to apply their own misunderstanding of it as if it were law.

(Adam) Starr v State, 49A04-0912-CR-677 (2010)
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06221001lmb.pdf
You are only required to ID yourself if you are suspected of an infraction or violation, period.

Thanks, this gives me a starting point!

 

[indyjoe]

I couldn't narrow it down to just 5. And if I looked harder, there are more state cases that should be known. A top 10 list would be better.

(Melvin) Washington v State, 49A02-0907-CR-649 (2010)
http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03041001jsk.pdf
The police may not search and unoccupied vehicle for a firearm without a warrant or RABCOS, when owner possesses a valid LTCH.

(Robert) Richardson v State, 49S02-0910-CR-428 (2010)
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06031001fsj.pdf
Production of a valid LTCH terminates all questioning vis-a-vis firearms possession.

(Jeron) Johnson v State, 71S03-0009-CR-529 (2001)
Converted file rdr
Fighting words + display of a firearm = threat/intimidation

(James) Malone v State, 49A02-0701-CR-18 (2008)
http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03200808jsk.pdf
The police may not seize a firearm from a person standing on their own front porch without a warrant, RABCOS, or RAS.

(Ken) Gunn v State, 49A02-1102-CR-82 (2011)
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/10241103pss.pdf
The law is what it is. It is unreasonable for the police to apply their own misunderstanding of it as if it were law.

(Adam) Starr v State, 49A04-0912-CR-677 (2010)
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06221001lmb.pdf
You are only required to ID yourself if you are suspected of an infraction or violation, period.

I think you missed the one about carrying a firearm along with coffee.

Great list. Thanks.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I think you missed the one about carrying a firearm along with coffee

Fine.

*drumming fingers on desk*

They are all against me. They are all against me. They are all against me.

 

[Bunnykid68]

YET AGAIN I am falsely accused. YET AGAIN The Man has me down.

Now you see the violence inherent in the system!



In what context? Carrying rights? No go zones? Stops? Vehicle stops? Criminal convictions? Applying for a carry license? Prohibiting rhino from dancing while armed?

The one in red

 

[indyjoe]

Fine.

*drumming fingers on desk*

They are all against me. They are all against me. They are all against me.

Hope that isn't talking to yourself. They take the guns away for crazy.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

To me the most important cases for gun carriers to know are cases defining the line between consensual encounter and detention. E.g. Overstreet, Clarke, Brown, Finger, inter alia.

 

[CathyInBlue]

(Todd) Overstreet v State, 55A01-9904-CR-110 (2000)
OVERSTREET v. STATE, No.
Flapping your gums at a consensual encounter can jump you straight to PC and arrest.

(Mark) Clarke v State, 49A05-0508-CR-435 (2006)
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/09290602pds.pdf
If overly persistent police venture from consensual encounter to investigatory detention, once the suspect no longer feels free to leave or disregard the police's orders, without RAS, searches and seizures are thereafter illegal.

State v (Wesley) Brown, 63A04-0506-CR-302 (2006)
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/01170601ewn.pdf
Search warrants supported only by unsworn testimony are defective on their face.

(Gregory) Finger v State, 49S02-0311-CR-587 (2003)
FINGER v. STATE, No.
Synopsis to come later. I'm bored with all the legalese.

And that makes 10 cases.

For the record, Justia sucks. They run everything together with no formatting.

 

[RabbleRouser]

YET AGAIN I am falsely accused. YET AGAIN The Man has me down.

Now you see the violence inherent in the system!



In what context? Carrying rights? No go zones? Stops? Vehicle stops? Criminal convictions? Applying for a carry license? Prohibiting rhino from dancing while armed?

help! help! I'm being repressed!

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]