Emerson decision is in

rick_renorick_reno Member Posts: 204 ✭✭✭
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/99/99-10331-cr0.htm Conclusion:Error has not been demonstrated in the district court's refusal to dismiss the indictment on commerce clause grounds. For the reasons stated, we reverse the district court's order granting the motion to dismiss the indictment under the Fifth Amendment. We agree with the district court that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to privately keep and bear their own firearms that are suitable as individual, personal weapons and are not of the general kind or type excluded by Miller, regardless of whether the particular individual is then actually a member of a militia.(66) However, for the reasons stated, we also conclude that the predicate order in question here is sufficient, albeit likely minimally so, to support the deprivation, while it remains in effect, of the defendant's Second Amendment rights. Accordingly, we reverse the district court's dismissal of the indictment on Second Amendment grounds. We remand the cause for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. REVERSED and REMANDED(67)
Sign In or Register to comment.