Search

Press Releases

2/15/2017 - NRA Got Spanked for Valentine’s Day!

2/3/2017 - President Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch

1/24/2017 -A Concealed Carry Case SCOTUS Can’t Refuse

1/23/2017 -President Trump’s Judicial Opportunity and Conundrum

1/13/2017 -NRA Tells Supreme Court Open Carry is Perverse

1/11/2017 - NRA Drops Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal

12/30/2016 - NRA Asks US Supreme Court To Hear Two Concealed Carry Lawsuits

12/10/2016 - National Concealed Carry Snake Oil Law Will Fail

11/29/2016 - What Lies Ahead for the Second Amendment?

11/10/2016 - The Second Amendment and President Trump

10/03/2016 - A Federal 9th Circuit Judge Finally Finds a Right to Bear Arms in Public

9/28/2016 - Are You Protected by the Fourth Amendment if You Carry a Firearm?

9/20/2016 - Two Concealed Carry Cases Fire Blanks in U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

9/8/2016 - Another Second Amendment Appeal Crashing and Burning in 9th Circuit

8/24/2016 - Concealed Carry Snake Oil and Kool-Aid Peddlers Leave Town for DC

8/18/2016 - The NRA Files Legal Challenge To California Open Carry Bans – But Not Really

8/17/2016 - The Battle for the Second Amendment Moves to Hawaii

8/15/2016 - There is No Right to Concealed Carry – 9th Circuit Denies Full Court Petitions

8/5/2016 - Did California Lie to 11 Federal Judges in Second Amendment Lawsuits?

7/15/2016 - God Save The US From The Second Amendment Lawyers

7/8/2016 - NRA Segregation Now, Tomorrow, and Forever Position Must Fail

7/4/2016 - Try Recalling California’s Anti-Gun Politicians Before Starting Your Revolution

6/27/2016 - NRA Head Wayne LaPierre Really, Really Hates the Second Amendment

6/24/2016 - Judges Who Uphold Bans on Concealed Carry Are Not the Same as Judges Who Look the Other Way When Police Murder People in the Street

6/15/2016 - Where is the NRA’s California Open Carry Lawsuit?

6/13/2016 - What’s Next for the Right to Carry Firearms in Public?

6/8/2016 - Florida Supreme Court Justices Voice Contempt for the Second Amendment

6/5/2016 - Florida Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Carry Case with National Ramifications

5/17/2016 - The Second Amendment and the Concealed Carry Problem

5/11/2016 - Federal Court of Appeals Goes Berserk During Second Amendment Gun Case Hearing

5/10/2016 - California Supreme Court Shoots Itself In Foot Over Gun Case

4/25/2016 - Second Amendment Foundation Files Another Concealed Carry Lawsuit: May Backfire

4/13/2016 - Has the NRA Come to Bury the Second Amendment or to Defend It? -

4/6/2016 - Second Amendment Must Wait A Bit Longer In 9th Circuit

3/26/2016 - Concealed Carry of Concealable Firearm in a Vehicle Now a Crime of Moral Turpitude

3/21/2016 - Supreme Court decision wasn’t about stun guns – It was about the Second Amendment decision in District of Columbia v. Heller which is bad news for concealed carry

3/7/2016 - How to Stop Anti-Gun Bills in California from Becoming Law

3/3/2016 - The California Supreme Court Case Which Could Upend the Gun-Groups Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/24/2016 - The Second Amendment - Checkmate in Four Moves?

2/10/2016 - Why California's Waiting Period to Purchase a Firearm Will Be Upheld

2/3/2016 - Florida House of Representatives Passes Handgun Open Carry Bill

1/27/2016 - The NRA Thinks Not Getting Caught In A Lie Is The Same Thing As Telling The Truth

12/11/2015 - Why Were the San Bernardino Shooting Victims Unarmed?

11/20/2015 - Attorney Alan Gura May Have Fumbled Another Second Amendment Case

11/20/2015 - HELP WANTED: Competent Second Amendment Lawyer - Inquire Within

11/9/2015 - The Supreme Court may have Finally Found its Next Second Amendment Case

9/2/2015 - Full Derp Battle over Concealed Carry in District of Columbia

9/1/2015 - National Rifle Association Drops Lawsuit against San Francisco

8/31/2015 - The Future of the Second Amendment in California and Hawaii

8/25/2015 - Yes, America, the Second Amendment is a Universal Right!

8/14/2015 - Will this be the Supreme Court’s Next Second Amendment Case?

7/3/2015 - The Future of Open Carry in California Looks Bright

6/16/2015 - State of California Concedes Second Amendment Extends Outside the Home

6/8/2015 - The Second Amendment is Now in the Hands of these Eleven Judges

6/8/2015 - Supreme Court Won’t Hear Second Amendment Cases Until there is a Circuit Split

5/29/2015 - NRA Opposes Open Carry – NRA Now Takes Credit for New Texas Handgun Open Carry Law

5/26/2015 - Four Years Ago Today: Is Open Carry The Right Guaranteed By The Second Amendment

5/18/2015 - Why the Second Amendment Keeps Losing in Court

5/2/2015 - Black Panther Party Invades California Capitol – 48 Years Ago Today

5/1/2015 - The NRA Rearranges Deck Chairs on the Titanic

4/22/2015 - Chief Judge of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Grants Motion of Lone Voice Defending the Second Amendment Open Carry Right

4/11/2015 - An Open Letter to the Orange County Register's Editorial on Concealed Carry

4/03/2015 - Another Shoe Drops on the California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/27/2015 - Federal Judge Says No Second Amendment Right To Own Firearms

12/6/2014 - The First Shoe Drops On California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

11/30/2014 - Open Carry Gunfight At The California Corral: Start Of Year Four

11/30/2014 - California Open Carry Gunfight Begins Its Fourth Year

11/12/2014 - California Concealed Carry Permits - The Fat Lady Still Hasn’t Sung in Peruta v. San Diego

10/17/2014 - It may be Legal to Carry a Handgun in the Nation’s Capitol by Christmas

10/3/2014 - Another California Concealed Carry Lawsuit Loses before a Federal Judge

8/18/2014 - District of Columbia asks Court for More Time to Enact New Handgun Carry Ban

8/13/2014 - California Concealed Carry Case Peruta v. San Diego – Poised to Move or Stuck in the Mud?

7/30/2014 - Federal Judge Reluctantly Stays his Ruling in DC Handgun Ban

7/28/2014 - The DC Handgun Carry Decision – Throwing Victory into the Jaws of Defeat

7/26/2014 - Ban on Carrying Firearms in Public is Unconstitutional says DC Judge

7/21/2014 - The non-repeal of D.C., Gun-Control

7/2/2014 - US Supreme Court Still Silent On Second Amendment

6/28/2014 - Federal Judge Says Minorities Barred From Bringing Civil Rights Lawsuits

6/7/2014 - The NRA Supports Open Carry Except When The NRA Opposes Open Carry

6/2/2014 - NRA Lawyer Says California Concealed Carry Decision Likely To Be Overturned

6/1/2014 - NRA leadership Comes Out Of The Closet In Its Opposition To Open Carry

Please donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the legal fund to restore your right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click here to donate to the legal fund

(Credit or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)

Please donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the fight to restore your right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click here to donate.

(Credit or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)

1AdtAJfcdBkA777fwtVhmCwSwCKGTFrgGz Press@CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

Norman v. State (Florida Supreme Court Open Carry Case)

Share

It has been 257 days since the Florida Supreme Court heard oral arguments in this case!

Here is an article expressing my view of what transpired during the oral argument before the Florida Supreme Court.

Florida Supreme Court Justices Voice Contempt for the Second Amendment

Norman v. State is a Florida Open Carry case.

Well, the oral arguments in Norman v. Florida did not go well.

Don’t be surprised if the Florida Supreme Court upholds the Open Carry ban under what it calls intermediate scrutiny.  The state’s attorney could not provide any procedural law justification for the ban other than to say that the Open Carry ban is a “policy choice” of the Florida legislature. Simply stating that something is a “policy choice” does not survive even intermediate scrutiny. It does not even survive the lowest level of scrutiny if the person challenging the law proves that the law was arbitrary, irrational, the need for enacting the law in the first place no longer exists, or that the law has triggered a requirement that it be subject to heightened scrutiny (such as adversely affecting a protected class).

Florida Supreme Court Granted Petition to Hear the Appeal

The Oral Arguments can be Viewed Online at http://wfsu.org/gavel2gavel/

Oral Arguments took place at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 8, 2016 Eastern Time (the Court is located in Tallahassee ).

One hopeful sign that the Florida Supreme Court will grant the petition to hear this case is that this case is listed on the High Profile page at the Florida Supreme Court website.  The bad news is there are eight appeals on the high profile list ahead of this case dating back as far as October 16, 2014.  We probably have a long wait ahead of us before this case is resolved.

It is an appeal of a criminal conviction for violating Florida’s Open Carry ban enacted in 1987.

Norman lost before a Florida appeals court and has now petitioned the Florida Supreme Court to reverse the decision.

Here is a link to the Florida Supreme Court docket.

 

The Florida State Court of Appeals upheld the Open Carry conviction on February 18, 2015.

The Florida State Court of Appeals denied the motion for rehearing/rehearing en banc on March 30, 2015.

Oral arguments are scheduled for Thursday, November 6, 2014, at 10:00 A.M., 20 minutes per side.  Live streaming video of the oral arguments can be viewed here.  This is an appeal of a criminal case.

Case No. 4D12-3525: Dale Lee Norman v. State

Here are the briefs for the petition stage.  The petition was granted on October 6, 2015.

The petition to review the decision from the court of appeals was granted.  Now the parties will file briefs on the merits.

Here are the briefs for the merits stage.

Petitioner’s initial brief on the merits was filed on November 25, 2015.

Respondent’s Answer Brief on the merits shall be served twenty days after service of petitioner’s initial brief on the merits. DUE January 20, 2016. Filed January 20, 2016.

Petitioner’s reply brief on the merits shall be served by the end of day on March 10, 2016.

The Clerk of the Fourth District Court of Appeal shall file the record which shall be properly indexed and paginated on or before December 7, 2015.

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT

Everytown Appendix 1 of 2

Everytown Appendix 2 of 2

Norman’s Request for Oral Arguments

Norman’s Motion to file an Oversize Brief

State of Florida Response to Motion to File an Oversize Reply Brief – The state of Florida filed a “non-opposition” opposition to Norman’s motion to file an oversize brief.

Norman’s Reply Brief

Appendix to Reply Brief

NRA Amicus brief

Norman v. State – Petitioner’s Notice of Supplemental Authority

A favorable decision in this case is not binding anywhere but Florida and only then if it is published (unpublished decisions apply only to the parties of a case), but if the decision is both favorable and published it certainly wouldn’t hurt my Open Carry case.

The Florida Court of Appeals upheld the Open Carry conviction on February 18, 2015.  A motion for rehearing/rehearing en banc was filed and denied.  Here is a link to the appellate docket.  A petition has now been filed with the Florida Supreme Court.  The petition was granted on October 6, 2015.  Here is a link to that docket.

Oral Arguments took place at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 8, 2016.

Of the High Profile cases, of which this is one, designated as such by the Florida Supreme Court, five of the ones which preceded this case have not been decided as of November 2, 2016.




Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 1,  2017 –  Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 14,  2017 –  Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 30,  2016 –  Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 5,  2016 –  It has been 180 days since the Florida Supreme Court heard oral arguments in this case!

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 30,  2016 –  Nothing new.  Check back on December 31, 2016.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 31, 2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 8, 2016 – Nothing new.  It has been three months since this case was taken under submission for a decision.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 19, 2016 – Nothing new.  The decision could easily be a year or more away.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 1, 2016 – Nothing new.  The decision could easily be a year or more away.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 13, 2016 – A notice of supplemental authority to the en banc Peruta decision was filed by Norman’s attorney. Norman v. State – Norman v. State – Petitioner’s Notice of Supplemental Authority

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 10, 2016 – The Florida attorney general filed a notice of supplement authority to the Peruta decision. She made no comment. Norman’s attorney should file a notice as well, with comment.

Click to open document06/06/2016NOTICE-SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITYPT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901 Click to open document06/06/2016REQUEST-JUDICIAL NOTICEPT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901FILED AS “PETITIONER’S MOTION TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY ORDER AND NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY”Click to open document06/07/2016ORDER-REQ JUDICIAL NOTICE GR Petitioner’s Motion to Take Judicial Notice of Administrative Agency Order and Notice of Supplemental Authority is hereby granted.06/08/2016ORAL ARGUMENT HELD  Click to open document06/09/2016NOTICE-SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITYRS State Of Florida STATE1 BY: RS Heidi Lynn Bettendorf 1805

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 8,  2016 – Well, the oral arguments in Norman v. Florida did not go well. Don’t be surprised if the Florida Supreme Court upholds the Open Carry ban under what it calls intermediate scrutiny.  The state’s attorney could not provide any procedural law justification for the ban other than to say that the #OpenCarry ban is a “policy choice” of the Florida legislature. Simply stating that something is a “policy choice” does not survive even intermediate scrutiny. It does not even survive the lowest level of scrutiny if the person challenging the law proves that the law was arbitrary, irrational, the need for enacting the law in the first place no longer exists, or that the law has triggered a requirement that it be subject to heightened scrutiny (such as adversely affecting a protected class).

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 25,  2016 – The pdf of the NRA Amicus brief finally showed up on the docket today.

Click to open document 04/18/2016 AMICUS CURIAE INITIAL BRIEF-MERITS MP National Rifle Association BY: MP Jason Brent Gonzalez 146854
04/18/2016 MOTION-ACCEPTANCE AS TIMELY FILED (BRIEF) MP National Rifle Association BY: MP Jason Brent Gonzalez 146854
Click to open document 04/25/2016 ORDER-ACCEPTANCE AS TIMELY FILED GR (BRIEF)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 19,  2016 – There is still no pdf of the NRA Amicus brief online at the Florida Supreme Court Docket. 2:37 PM

Click to open document 04/15/2016 LETTER MP National Rifle Association BY: MP Robert Dowlut DATED 04/12/2016 (PRO HAC VICE FEE ATTACHED)
04/18/2016 AMICUS CURIAE ANSWER BRIEF-MERITS MP National Rifle Association BY: MP Jason Brent Gonzalez 146854
04/18/2016 MOTION-ACCEPTANCE AS TIMELY FILED (BRIEF) MP National Rifle Association BY: MP Jason Brent Gonzalez 146854

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 11,  2016 – Today, the motion for the NRA to become an Amicus was granted provided that the $100 pro hac vice fee is paid on time.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 8,  2016 – Today, the motion filed pro hac vice yesterday appears, along with with a motion by the NRA and an order allowing it to file an Amicus Brief only.

Click to open document 04/07/2016 MOTION-COUNS PRO HAC VICE (FOREIGN COUNSEL) Robert Dowlut BY: Robert Dowlut
Click to open document 04/07/2016 MOTION-AMICUS CURIAE MP National Rifle Association BY: MP Jason Brent Gonzalez 146854 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANT BY THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
04/08/2016 ORAL ARGUMENT CALENDAR
Click to open document 04/08/2016 ORDER-AMICUS CURIAE GR

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 7,  2016 – Today, a motion was filed pro hac vice.  The motion was not available on the docket nor was the identity of the lawyer.

04/07/2016 MOTION-COUNS PRO HAC VICE (FOREIGN COUNSEL)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 21,  2016 – The Florida Supreme Court did not waste any time scheduling oral arguments.  This case wasn’t even fully briefed until last Tuesday.  Oral arguments are now scheduled for June 8, 2016.

Click to open document 03/21/2016 ORDER-OA SCHED (PREV ACCEPTED) The Court previously accepted jurisdiction. The Court will hear oral argument at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 8, 2016. A maximum of twenty minutes to the side is allowed for the argument, but counsel is expected to use only so much of that time as is necessary. NO CONTINUANCES WILL BE GRANTED EXCEPT UPON A SHOWING OF EXTREME HARDSHIP.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 15,  2016 – Norman’s motion to file an oversize reply brief was granted.  Any Amicus brief notwithstanding, this case is now fully briefed and we awaiting oral arguments.

Click to open document 03/10/2016 REPLY BRIEF-MERITS PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901
Click to open document 03/10/2016 APPENDIX-MERIT BRIEF PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901 Filed as Petitioner’s Appendix to Reply Brief
Click to open document 03/10/2016 REQUEST-ORAL ARGUMENT PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901
Click to open document 03/10/2016 MOTION-BRIEF PAGE ENLARGEMENT PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901 FILED AS “MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT”
Click to open document 03/11/2016 RESPONSE RS State Of Florida STATE1 BY: RS Heidi Lynn Bettendorf 1805 FILED AS “RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERSIZED BRIEF”
Click to open document 03/15/2016 ORDER-BRIEF PAGE ENLARGEMENT GR Petitioner’s Motion to Exceed Page Limit is hereby granted and said brief consisting of twenty pages was filed with this Court on March 10, 2016.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 11,  2016 – Norman filed a motion to file an oversize Reply Brief.  When the Florida Supreme Court approves some version of a reply brief then I will post it online above the fold.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 10,  2016 – Norman filed a couple of motions which were granted.  He now has until close of business on March 10, 2016 within which to file his Reply Brief.  After that, the case will be fully briefed.  We will then wait for oral arguments and a decision.  I am not aware of any deadlines for the court to schedule oral arguments or to issue a decision.

Click to open document 02/09/2016 MOTION-EXT OF TIME (REPLY BRIEF-MERITS) PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901 PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF
Click to open document 02/09/2016 MOTION-TOLL TIME PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901 PETITIONER’S MOTION TO TOLL TIME
Click to open document 02/10/2016 ORDER-EXT OF TIME GR (REPLY BRIEF-MERITS) Petitioner’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief is granted and petitioner is allowed to and including March 10, 2016, in which to serve the reply brief on the merits. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME WILL BE GRANTED TO PETITIONER FOR THE FILING OF THE REPLY BRIEF ON THE MERITS.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 1,  2016 – Everytown for Gun- Safety filed its Amicus brief.  BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT

Click to open document 02/01/2016 AMICUS CURIAE INITIAL BRIEF-MERITS MR Everytown For Gun Safety BY: MR Glenn Thomas Burhans, Jr. 605867 BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT
02/01/2016 APPENDIX MR Everytown For Gun Safety BY: MR Glenn Thomas Burhans, Jr. 605867 APPENDIX OF HISTORICAL LAWS OF AMICUS CURIAE EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT VOLUME 1 OF 2
02/01/2016 APPENDIX MR Everytown For Gun Safety BY: MR Glenn Thomas Burhans, Jr. 605867 APPENDIX OF HISTORICAL LAWS OF AMICUS CURIAE EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT VOLUME 2 OF 2

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 29,  2016 – Administrative stuff:

Click to open document 01/28/2016 MOTION-COUNS PRO HAC VICE (FOREIGN COUNSEL) MR Everytown For Gun Safety BY: MR Deepak Gupta VERIFIED MOTION FOR ADMISSION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE PURSUANT TO FLORIDA RULE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.510
Click to open document 01/28/2016 MOTION-COUNS PRO HAC VICE (FOREIGN COUNSEL) MR Everytown For Gun Safety BY: MR Jonathan E. Taylor VERIFIED MOTION FOR ADMISSION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE PURSUANT TO FLORIDA RULE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 2.510
Click to open document 01/29/2016 ORDER-COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE GR (FOREIGN COUNSEL) The Verified Motion for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice Pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510 filed in the above cause by Deepak Gupta, on behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety, is hereby granted contingent upon counsel’s payment of the $100.00 fee required by section 25.241(3), Florida Statutes (2004), within ten days from the date of this order. FAILURE TO TIMELY COMPLY WITH THE PAYMENT REQUIREMENT COULD RESULT IN THIS ORDER BEING VACATED AND THE MOTION BEING DENIED.
Click to open document 01/29/2016 ORDER-COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE GR (FOREIGN COUNSEL) The Verified Motion for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice Pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510 filed in the above cause by Jonathan E. Taylor, on behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety, is hereby granted contingent upon counsel’s payment of the $100.00 fee required by section 25.241(3), Florida Statutes (2004), within ten days from the date of this order. FAILURE TO TIMELY COMPLY WITH THE PAYMENT REQUIREMENT COULD RESULT IN THIS ORDER BEING VACATED AND THE MOTION BEING DENIED.
01/29/2016 FEE DUE-PRO HAC VICE
01/29/2016 FEE DUE-PRO HAC VICE

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 28,  2016 – Yesterday, the court granted the motion by the anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety to file an Amicus brief.  On December 15, 2015 the same court denied the motion of Mississippi Carry Inc., to file an Amicus brief.

Click to open document 01/27/2016 ORDER-AMICUS CURIAE GR The Motion of Everytown for Gun Safety for Leave to File a Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondent filed by Everytown for Gun Safety is hereby granted and they are allowed to file brief only in support of respondent. The brief by the above referenced amicus curiae shall be served pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.370(c).
Click to open document 01/27/2016 ORDER-COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE (FOREIGN COUNSEL) Any attorney involved in the above case who is not a member of The Florida Bar should immediately file a proper motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510, if they wish to have this Court consider them as counsel of record. Failure to file a proper motion could result in the imposition of sanctions, including striking the pleading listing the foreign attorney as counsel of record.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 25,  2016 – Today, Norman filed an objection to the motion by Everytown for Gun Safety to become an Amicus.  It is wonderfully written and reads like something I would write.  You can read it here.

Click to open document 01/25/2016 OTHER RESPONSE PT Dale Lee Norman BY: PT Eric J. Friday 797901 PETITIONER’S RESPONSE TO MOTION OF EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 20,  2016 – The State of Florida’s Answer Brief on the merits was filed today.

Click to open document 01/20/2016 ANSWER BRIEF-MERITS RS State Of Florida STATE1 BY: RS Heidi Lynn Bettendorf 1805 RESPONDENT’S BRIEF ON THE MERITS

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 19,  2016 – “Everytown for Gun Safety” filed a motion to become an Amicus.  The motion is dated as being filed on January 15, 2016 but it was not on the docket when I checked yesterday.  Here is the Motion.  The State of Florida’s Answer Brief is due tomorrow.

EDIT: You might recall that “Everytown for Gun Safety” filed an Amicus brief in the Peruta/Richards case where it extensively argued that there is no right to carry a firearm in public.

In its motion here, “Everytown” claims:

“Everytown’s brief will present this Court with a broad array of historical materials that were overlooked by both the court below and the Peruta panel. These materials show that Florida’s law—which allows concealed carry under a shall-issue permitting regime—falls well within a seven-century Anglo American tradition of regulating the public carry of firearms.”

That’s right. In California “Everytown” claims that there is no right to carry firearms in public but in Florida “shall-issue” concealed carry is all fine and dandy.

Just another of the many valid reasons why lawyers are held in such disregard by the American People.

01/15/2016 MOTION-AMICUS CURIAE MR Everytown For Gun Safety BY: MR Glenn Thomas Burhans, Jr. 605867 MOTION OF EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 17,  2015 – Today, the state filed a motion for an extension of time to file its brief which was due on or before the 20th of this month.  We won’t know the new due date until the court responds. UPDATE:

Respondent’s motion for extension of time is granted, and respondent is allowed to and including January 20, 2016, in which to serve the answer brief on the merits. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME WILL BE GRANTED TO RESPONDENT FOR THE FILING OF THE ANSWER BRIEF ON THE MERITS. All other times will be extended accordingly.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 15,  2015 – From today’s docket: “The Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed in the above cause by Mississippi Carry, Inc. on behalf of petitioner is hereby denied. The Motion for Admission to Appear Pro Hac Vice is hereby denied as moot and Check No. #8140 is returned herewith.” The state as of 2:21 PM Pacific Time still has not filed for an extension which means the state’s Answering brief is due on or before December 20th.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 13,  2015 – The state filed a response to the deficient filing of the Amicus Brief by Mississippi Carry in which it pointed out that the filing was made past the deadline and if the court accepts the brief then the court should clarify when the state’s brief on the merits is due.  Here is a link to the state’s response.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 30,  2015 – Nothing new on the docket.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 26,  2015 – The Initial Brief on the Merits (Opening Brief) has been filed with the Florida Supreme Court.  The state has 20 days to file an answering brief but will no doubt get an extension of time to file its brief should it ask.  The brief can be read at the following link.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 26,  2015 – The Florida Supreme Court has extended the filing date for the petitioner’s initial brief on the merits.  The brief is now due on November 25, 2015.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 6,  2015 – The Florida Supreme Court has decided to hear the case.

The Court accepts jurisdiction of this case as to the notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction filed pursuant to Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (i.e., expressly declares valid a state statute and expressly construes a provision of the state or federal constitution). Petitioner’s initial brief on the merits shall be served on or before October 26, 2015; respondent’s answer brief on the merits shall be served twenty days after service of petitioner’s initial brief on the merits; and petitioner’s reply brief on the merits shall be served twenty days after service of respondent’s answer brief on the merits. The Clerk of the Fourth District Court of Appeal shall file the record which shall be properly indexed and paginated on or before December 7, 2015. The Clerk may provide the record in the format as currently maintained at the district court, either paper or electronic. This case was also submitted to the Court on jurisdictional briefs addressing as an alternative basis for jurisdiction under Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (i.e., express and direct conflict). The Court has determined that it should decline to accept jurisdiction on that alternative basis, and thus hereby denies the petition for review as to that alternative basis. No motion for rehearing will be entertained by the Court in this regard. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.330(d). As discussed above, the Court accepts jurisdiction and orders briefing only on the basis of Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (i.e., expressly declares valid a state statute and expressly construes a provision of the state or federal constitution). The Court having accepted jurisdiction, oral argument will be set by separate order. Counsel for the parties will be notified of the oral argument date approximately sixty days prior to oral argument.

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 3,  2015 – There has been no activity on the Florida Supreme Court docket since May 1st.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 1,  2015 – There has been no activity on the Florida Supreme Court docket since May 1st.

Update May 4, 2015  The Florida Attorney General filed a brief on May 1, which basically says that the Florida Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the case if it wants to.

Update May 3, 2015  Other than an acknowledgment of receipt (presumably of the petition) on April 17, there hasn’t been any docket activity.

Update April 16, 2015  Here is Norman’s petition to the Florida Supreme Court filed on April 13, 2015.

Update March 30, 2015 – the Florida Court of Appeals denied Norman’s motion for a rehearing/rehearing en banc today.  I don’t know if it would make a difference but his attorney did not file a notice that the Peruta case, which the Florida Court of Appeals relied on in part, was vacated.  Here is a link to the docket.

Update March 5, 2015 – Norman’s attorney filed a motion for rehearing/rehearing en banc.

Update February 18, 2015 – The Florida Court of Appeals upheld Norman’s Open Carry conviction saying that Open Carry is subject to intermediate scrutiny and since Norman could carry concealed, Florida gets to ban Open Carry if it want’s to.  At this stage, Norman can either appeal to the Florida Supreme Court or file a cert petition with the US Supreme Court.  Here is a link to the decision.

Update January 20, 2015 – We are still waiting for the decision.

Update November 7, 2014 – Here are the oral arguments.

Share