Arrested in Courthouse

[xd.40]

imported post

Straight from the PWC website:

http://www.co.prince-william.va.us/default.aspx?topic=010051999990000456

Courthouse Weapon Policy [align=left]NOTICE![/align] Metal detectors and X-ray scanning machines arein use at the Judicial Center entrance. All persons entering the Judicial Center are subject to search. No guns, knives, pepper gas, mace, tools, sharp objects including scissors or other weapons of any kind are allowed in the Judicial Center per 18.2 - 283.1 Code of Virginia.

No camera phones by order of the Circuit Court.
To avoid delay (and possibly miss your scheduled hearing), it is highly recommended that you check your pockets, brief cases, backpacks, key rings, etc. to ensure that you have no objects with you that could conceivably be used as a weapon. Do not overlook items such as penknives or fingernail clippers. You will not be allowed into the building with them. Plan ahead - leave questionable objects at home or in your car.


I don't see on here where it says that you will be arrested for any offense (although my common sense tells me that is the case...)

 

[Mike]

imported post

thorsmitersaw wrote:

I drove to the county clerks office today in an attempt to obtain my concealed permit.

Not to be too picky but gun carriers need to be smarter about gun stuff than the average bear.

CHPs are applied for thru the "Clerk of the Circuit Court" - there is no such thing as a County Clerk in Virginia.

Knowledge of this fact would presumably have sent a red flag up over this venture b/f leaving home that day.

Under the facts as you describe, you did not attempt to enter with the magazine, you declared it; further, as the arrest appears unlawful, the spare round should be suppressed by motion under Moore v. Commonwealth. You should spend what it takes to have a good attorney fight this for you, including litigating the issue of being unlawfully arrested for a misdemeanor, and, being charged for makinga declaration (case law may be out there already applying such declarations and rendering the possession not unlawful).

 

[Virginiaplanter]

imported post

It was Sutherland and the Wither's cases decided at the same time. No Cowboys, as it was the early 20th Century. The Redskins didn't exist either.


“It is an ancient maxim of the law that all such statutes must be construed strictly against the state and favorably to the liberty of the citizen. The maxim is founded on the tenderness of the law for the rights of individuals and on the plain principle that the power of punishment is vested in the legislature and not in the judicial department. No man incurs a penalty unless the act which subjects him to it is clearly within the spirit and letter of the statute which imposes such penalty. There can be no constructive offenses, and before a man can be punished his case must be plainly and unmistakably within the statute. If these principals are violated, the fate of the accused is determined by the arbitrary discretion of the judges and not by the express authority of the law.” Wither’s Case, 109 Va. 837, 1909.

“ it would be dangerous indeed to carry the principal that a case which is within the reason or mischief of a statute, is within its provisions, so far as to punish a crime not enumerated in the statute because it is of a kindred character with those which are enumerated. If the statute be less comprehensive than the legislature intended, it is for that body to extend its operation and not for the courts to do so. “ Sutherland’s Case, 109 Va. 834, 1909.

 

[72Malibu]

imported post

Kinda scary. When I went to pick up my CHP from the Orange County Courthouse, I walked in the door to the metal detector and began unloading my pockets. I had a cameraphone (which was given back to me after I passed through the detector. (?!). Also, I had my pocketknife on me and similar to the original post in this thread, I didn't realize I had it on me. Quietly I asked the guy at the metal detector (an actual LEO) if I could leave it there with him unless he'd rather I put it back in my car. He said I could leave it there, he took and put it in the desk drawer and I went up to get my CHP. I came back down and on my way out asked for it back, he gave it back and I was on my way.

I guess I could have been arrested and charged as well if the LEO weren't so cool about it?

 

[Renegade]

imported post

[align=center]BEWARE!!!
[/align]
§ 18.2-283.1 states " It shall be unlawful for any person to possess in or transport into any courthouse..."

As I read it you are in violation of the abovementioned code as soon as you walk into any courthouse. No matter what any LEO says - you are in violation of the law. I would not enter into any courthouse in VA with anything on the prohibited list period.

Freeflight wrote:

I posted this already, but.. I was at the VA Beach circuit courts and Asked them if they had a Firearm Check... He said yes they do. I didn't try it out but I will next time.

Agent19 wrote:

The officer told me I could have secured my "ITEMS" there rather than run back to my car.
:banghead:
Hope I never need to use them but nice to know they are there.

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

What I'ved learned from this thread is that if I am ina similar situation and I feel some contraband in my pocket, to immediately grab up my other items and excuse myself because I forgot something and I'll be right back. If that looks suspicious then so be it. Suspicion beats admission of guilt, I think.

That said, the law could use an adjustment here, to say the least. According to the OP, there was no criminal intent, and not even an actual weapon. Until the law gets fixed to protect honest mistakes, this is a poster child for jury nullification.

Hopefully it won't wind up going that far.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

possumboy wrote:

I agree with LEO 229 on your answers? Also, where you really detained for a Class 1 Misdemeanor? You should have been issued a summons and sent back to your car to deposit the mags.

You should have only been arrested and searched if you refused to stop what you were doing illegally - you didn't say you were going to bring them in anyway did you?

What were you charged with (what is written on your summons)?

"Any such weapon shall be subject to seizure by a law-enforcement officer."

The illegal item could be confiscated. Also agree that he should have been released on a summons.

Interested to know the actual charge on the summons.

 

[HankT]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

possumboy wrote:

I agree with LEO 229 on your answers? Also, where you really detained for a Class 1 Misdemeanor? You should have been issued a summons and sent back to your car to deposit the mags.

You should have only been arrested and searched if you refused to stop what you were doing illegally - you didn't say you were going to bring them in anyway did you?

What were you charged with (what is written on your summons)?

"Any such weapon shall be subject to seizure by a law-enforcement officer."

The illegal item could be confiscated. Also agree that he should have been released on a summons.

Interested to know the actual charge on the summons.

Yes, that would be interesting.

 

[savery]

imported post

Wow, what a load of bullshit.

You'd have been better off geting caught with a bag of pot!

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-250.1




According to the second amendment, charging you like they did is illegal anyway.:cuss:

 

[sjhipple]

imported post

Anyone with experience in criminal law in Virginia may know this, but...is a "purposely" or "knowingly" mens rea implied for crimes in Virginia?

Mens Rea: Latin for Guilty mind. For every crime there is an Actus Reus (Guilty ACT) and a Mens Rea (guilty mind).

In other words, you have to do a bad THING with a certain state of mind.

This statute lists no state of mind. Often, the state of mind that is IMPLIED in statutes that don't mention a state of mind is "purposely" or "knowingly." I wonder if the fact that you didn't know helps your case.

(FYI: other states of mind are "negligently" and "recklessly").

--

Second, the same thing that I've been saying on this forum over and over again: DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE. IT WILL NEVER, EVER HELP YOU. Remain silent and, if necessary, tell them you will answer questions through your lawyer. I only hope you didn't harm your case by answering those guys' questions.

 

[sjhipple]

imported post

savery wrote:

Wow, what a load of bullshit.

You'd have been better off geting caught with a bag of pot!

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-250.1

Both acts are equally harmless and both should carry the same penalty: NOTHING

 

[sjhipple]

imported post

One more thing...

As others are saying, please get an attorney. He may get you out of it...but more importantly, he may be able to get a plea deal that doesn't include jail time.

It's often been said that a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. I say a libertarian is anyone whose been mugged by their government.

 

[gsh341]

imported post

Every time I have to go to a courthouse or any other place that has similar rules I empty my pockets and basically frisk myself. Once I've done that I grab the few items I can carry in (wallet, keys and whatever paperwork I need to have) and go inside. I even leave my change in the car .

Despite that, have been delayed entering the Lincoln County Courthouse so they could search my steel-toed boots for hidden weapons because they set off the metal detector. :quirkyAll so I could drop a form off at the clerks office and walk out. A trip of 20 feet from the door and 15 seconds in the clerks office.

 

[Virginiaplanter]

imported post

ama-gi wrote:

Anyone with experience in criminal law in Virginia may know this, but...is a "purposely" or "knowingly" mens rea implied for crimes in Virginia?

"In the final analysis, the issue whether mens rea or scienter is a necessary element in the indictment and proof of a particular crime becomes a question of legislative intent to be construed by the court. United States v. Balint, 258 U.S. 250, 251-52 (1922)....Thus, to insert a mens rea element into the offense, and to require proof thereof, would defeat the statutory purpose, which is to criminalize the introduction of firearms into a school environment. So we will not add, by implication, language to the statute that the legislature expressly has chosen not to include. Consequently, we hold that the trial court correctly decided, in refusing the instruction in question, that this statute is one of strict criminal liability, and that the Commonwealth was required to prove only that the defendant had possessed, on school property, a firearm of the type described in the statute." Esteban v. Commonwealth, 266 Va. 605, 607, 587. S.E.2d 523, 525 (2003)

 

[sjhipple]

imported post

Virginiaplanter wrote: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/users/3286.html

In the final analysis, the issue whether mens rea or scienter is a necessary element in the indictment and proof of a particular crime becomes a question of legislative intent to be construed by the court. United States v. Balint, 258 U.S. 250, 251-52 (1922)....Thus, to insert a mens rea element into the offense, and to require proof thereof, would defeat the statutory purpose, which is to criminalize the introduction of firearms into a school environment. So we will not add, by implication, language to the statute that the legislature expressly has chosen not to include. Consequently, we hold that the trial court correctly decided, in refusing the instruction in question, that this statute is one of strict criminal liability, and that the Commonwealth was required to prove only that the defendant had possessed, on school property, a firearm of the type described in the statute." Esteban v. Commonwealth, 266 Va. 605, 607, 587. S.E.2d 523, 525 (2003)

Oh my god... (btw, how did you find this? What were your search terms?)

So for this statute, even if you didn't know that you were committing the act, you're guilty. Bullshit.

Strict liability crimes are disgusting...absolutely disgusting. The idea that a person who accidentally commits a crime will still be punished, even though he acted with no malice, no guilty mind, no intent...just disgusting. What an evil government we live under....destroying the lives of good, honest people is not what a good government does.

This is when Fully Informed Juries are important. It's important that everyone knows that THEY HAVE THE RIGHT - THE RESPONSIBILITY - AS A JUROR TO ACQUIT AN OTHERWISE GUILTY DEFENDANT IF THEY BELIEVE THE LAW IS WRONG. This is legal and part of the American tradition (American juries often refused to convict for English crimes they considered immoral). It's time the people were informed of this right again so that we can stop, or at least alleviate the damage from, madness like this case. If you ever sit on a jury, remember that a judge CANNOT punish you for what verdict you come back with and why...EVER.

"The pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogative to disregard ... instructions of the judge" -- District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, in Unites States v. Dougherty, 1972

"I consider a trial by jury the only anchor yet imagined by man by whicha government can be held to the principles of its constitution." -- Thomas Jefferson

 

[sjhipple]

imported post

triple post

 

[sjhipple]

imported post

triple post

 

[rabbit994]

imported post

gsh341 wrote:

Every time I have to go to a courthouse or any other place that has similar rules I empty my pockets and basically frisk myself. Once I've done that I grab the few items I can carry in (wallet, keys and whatever paperwork I need to have) and go inside. I even leave my change in the car .

Despite that, have been delayed entering the Lincoln County Courthouse so they could search my steel-toed boots for hidden weapons because they set off the metal detector. :quirkyAll so I could drop a form off at the clerks office and walk out. A trip of 20 feet from the door and 15 seconds in the clerks office.

Same here, any time I'm getting near an airport or restricted area, I give myself a pat down for anything and if I'm with someone else, we double check each other. If you carry a gun, it's something you should always do. Entering a restricted Area? SELF PAT DOWN.

 

[taurusfan]

imported post

"but again I did not know/remember I had the magazine on me"

Perhaps you shouldn't be having a concealed permit given such astonishing forgetfulness?

When I went to court for my permit I was acutely aware of everything in my possession.

FORGET I HAD A MAGAZINE OF BULLETS? I drove to the court rather than travel by some other means just so I could have a place to lock my cell phone.

 

[OC-Glock19]

imported post

Carrying concealed or even just carrying a gun in general demands that you not only plan your next move but your entire day. I have to think at the beginning of the day where I will be going and what I'll be doing. If there's the remotest chance that I'll have to go to D.C. or Maryland while I'mplanning myerrands the gun goes in the safe. If my kids forgot their musical instrument on band day and I have to deliver it to them I do a mental and physical pat-down to make sure that I'm in compliance with the law before I even get in the car to go to the school.

When you take on the responsibilty of carrying a gun for self defense you owe it to yourself and everyone else to increase your awareness level in addition to increasing your awareness of potential bad guys/situations. You don't want to get into any lazy habits that can/will bite you in the ass later.