Jump to content
CJack

NJ Handgun Carry Permit Application Experience

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, samiam said:

Directive 06-19 by NJ Courts Admin Glenn Grant referred to elsewhere in this thread says that, while the law does not mention procsecutor review, since most NJ Superior Courts were already doing that, it is permissible. However, he gives 14 days for the prosecutor to review; if no action is taken, the presumption is that there is no objection from that quarter. I don't like it , but it could probably be worse. 

Ocean County sent to the prosecutor as well. He is supposedly a big Lib but it was still approved beginning to end in 42 days so I wouldn’t worry about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, samiam said:

Directive 06-19 by NJ Courts Admin Glenn Grant referred to elsewhere in this thread says that, while the law does not mention procsecutor review, since most NJ Superior Courts were already doing that, it is permissible. However, he gives 14 days for the prosecutor to review; if no action is taken, the presumption is that there is no objection from that quarter. I don't like it , but it could probably be worse. 

I don’t believe she was implying a meeting between the judge and the prosecutor about specific applications. It almost sounded like the judge just doesn’t know what to do and is looking for guidance on how to proceed. My gut says “restrictions” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Burlington County Update:

Hearings are required!

Just spoke with Judge Cooks office, not Alex who handles the courts firearms permitting. 

In person hearings are required. Mine is set for 9/12 at 10:00. Apparently my notice should be here today. If not, probably Tuesday.  But they were mailed. 

They’re getting back to me on whether or not the judge will issue permit on the spot or mail back to PD. 

Also, no word on whether or not we’ll see these absurd restriction via court order like other counties. Guess we’ll find out soon.

Not thrilled about this but at least it’s moving forward. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, snappy456 said:

I would think that loading/unloading a firearm in a publicly visible area is probable cause for a search at minimum, not to mention could get you a nervous cop with a pistol aimed at you.

The court order is literally demanding you brandish your firearm before entering you're vehicle.

It is the only way to abide by the order. Yo cannot even enter your car and then put the gun in its case and then bring it to the truck.

The moment you enter the vehicle while carrying the firearm, you are breaking the order. Therefore you have to carry to your trunk, unholster, drop mag, put in case, put in trunk, and then you can enter your vehicle. And then obviously reverse order when leaving the vehicle.

#11 of that order is a direct threat to public safety and the safety of the permit holder, and extremely negligent of the court. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, samiam said:

In a way, that seems worse to me, overall. Judges and prosecutors confer all the time about the disposition of individual cases (admittedly, those mostly involve criminal and civil litigation, not administrative matters, and the person who is the subject of the conversation is entitled to be, and likely already is, represented by counsel). If the Judicial and Executive (Law Enforcement/Prosecutorial) branches are meeting to discuss how best to curtail a Consitutional right and civil liberty for a broad category of the citizenry, to my IANAL mind that smacks of impermissable collusion and/or a conspiracy to deny that right. Branches of government are made separate and distinct for some very good reasons.

Definitely agree with you there! My only concern now is the same as everyone else’s… how long is this “meeting” going to take to happen? And what kind of bs is going to be attached to the permit. Unreasonable restrictions 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim Jones said:

Ocean County sent to the prosecutor as well. He is supposedly a big Lib but it was still approved beginning to end in 42 days so I wouldn’t worry about that.

Hey, just wondering. How did you find out that Judge Gizinski was using the prosecutor’s office? Can’t understand why they would, didn’t the PD already perform a background check?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, marlintag said:

Update from Middlesex County!

I called the Middlesex County Superior Court and my PD this morning after seeing that my money order was still not cashed. The court clerk told me that they do not have my application and my name does not appear anywhere. She stated that they are overloaded with carry applications and that the judge has not signed off any applications. It sounded from our brief conversation that there is no date or timeframe for the judge to even begin looking at these applications. I then called my PD who told me that indeed my application was signed off and sent to the court weeks ago!!! How's that for some crazy SHIT!!  The court clerk did take my number down to call me back on the chance they found my application. If your in Middlesex, you can forget a smooth and speedy issuance of your carry permit. So, which attorney should I go with? I'm thinking Jef Henninger or Dan Schmutter. :mad:

I called the court again to discuss what my PD told me. It appears they have indeed "lost" my application. From what I understand the assignment judge has not signed off or viewed any  Post-Bruen applications. I was told by the court to call back next week as the person in charge is going on vacation. Strikeforce has been emailed regarding this issue. Retaining an attorney is now on the table...

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, samiam said:

Good call on Strike Force and potentially retaining attorney. I don't hear about courts losing other kinds of official documents, pretty much EVER. There is an apparent element of misfeasance (or possibly malfeasance) there. Maybe that is something the pro-2A outfits might want to pursue independently. It would be nice if I had some confidence that this process will improve over time because of professionalism on the part of law enforcement and the judiciary, but I do not. Frankly, I'm pretty well convinced that none of this shite is going to get any better until and unless we find some way to make these a-holes have some fear of the consequences of not doing their phony-baloney jobs.  

Harrumph! The tenets of malfeasance look pretty straightforward, but I wonder how much judges really worry about that. There must be some way to pressure the courts to do their jobs properly - maybe StrikeForce is the stick. Of course, the state sits  at the poker table with our unlimited tax money, so the only chance for even a meager push is a lawsuit that negates state defense representation for the misfeasor.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, marlintag said:

I called the court again to discuss what my PD told me. It appears they have indeed "lost" my application. From what I understand the assignment judge has not signed off or viewed any  Post-Bruen applications. I was told by the court to call back next week as the person in charge is going on vacation. Strikeforce has been emailed regarding this issue. Retaining an attorney is now on the table...

First time I emailed the records clerk after my PD sent my application to Middlesex she could not find it on her list of received applications. Within 6 hours she emailed me to say she had it. 
If your application is on the bottom of a stack and not yet entered onto the list the clerk would have no way of knowing the application had been received by the court.  And the court likely has stacks, plural, of received applications not yet entered into the system. 

My guess is that the application will show up at Middlesex a week or two after Labor Day.

What you could do is ask the PD when they sent your application and then politely email the clerk a week after Labor Day and tell her when and which PD sent over your application  and ask if you could please confirm receipt.

i would have the email read something like this:

My local police department tells me that they sent over my approved carry permit application on about August __ . If possible, could you please confirm that it has been received.

Name

Address

email

phone

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, galapoola said:

Hey, just wondering. How did you find out that Judge Gizinski was using the prosecutor’s office? Can’t understand why they would, didn’t the PD already perform a background check?

She wrote she worked with the prosecutors office prior to approving on the court order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, marlintag said:

I called the court again to discuss what my PD told me. It appears they have indeed "lost" my application. From what I understand the assignment judge has not signed off or viewed any  Post-Bruen applications. I was told by the court to call back next week as the person in charge is going on vacation. Strikeforce has been emailed regarding this issue. Retaining an attorney is now on the table...

Same exact thing happened to me when I called the Clerk. We have no record of your application. They said call back in 2 weeks.  13 days later PD called me and said my permit was ready for pickup! I wouldn’t panic yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, samiam said:

You are being far too generous. If these applications are being mailed from the PD to the court, it should be by registered mail, or, at bare minimum, return receipt requested. If they are being conveyed by official courier in batches, there needs to be a control list with check-offs and signatures, which should also be done if multiple applications are being mailed in the same package. Anything less than that is inexcusable. I'm convinced that if the documents being conveyed were on some other legal matter that the PD and court considered to be vitally important, much greater care would be taken, and those documents would not be lost, or even temporarily mislaid. 

Worked for me and then my money order was cashed by Middlesex a week later.

Like it or not, Judges' chambers are very busy places and very thinly staffed.  It would be highly unusual if the deluge of post Bruen carry permit applications did not cause sizeable delays.  

And to say it is the Judges' own fault is not fair.  Until Bruen Judges were bound by their Oath of Office to follow New Jersey Supreme Court precedent--and they did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bushmaster1313 said:

First time I emailed the records clerk after my PD sent my application to Middlesex she could not find it on her list of received applications. Within 6 hours she emailed me to say she had it. 
If your application is on the bottom of a stack and not yet entered onto the list the clerk would have no way of knowing the application had been received by the court.  And the court likely has stacks, plural, of received applications not yet entered into the system. 

My guess is that the application will show up at Middlesex a week or two after Labor Day.

What you could do is ask the PD when they sent your application and then politely email the clerk a week after Labor Day and tell her when and which PD sent over your application  and ask if you could please confirm receipt.

i would have the email read something like this:

My local police department tells me that they sent over my approved carry permit application on about August __ . If possible, could you please confirm that it has been received.

Name

Address

email

phone

 

 

 

The clerk was called twice and checked twice, there is no receipt of my application. PD said they sent it more than two weeks ago. I spoke with the court twice and PD once, I got no answer. 

12 minutes ago, Jim Jones said:

Same exact thing happened to me when I called the Clerk. We have no record of your application. They said call back in 2 weeks.  13 days later PD called me and said my permit was ready for pickup! I wouldn’t panic yet.

The difference between your experience and mine is that in your case the PD may not have sent it yet when you called the clerk. My case is very different and more concerning, the PD is saying they sent it more than two weeks ago!!! The court should have my application in the stack AND THEY DONT!. That's the issue. Samiam is correct, applications should be recorded when received by the court without exception. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, marlintag said:

The clerk was called twice and checked twice, there is no receipt of my application. PD said they sent it more than two weeks ago. I spoke with the court twice and PD once, I got no answer. 

The difference between your experience and mine is that in your case the PD may not have sent it yet when you called the clerk. My case is very different and more concerning, the PD is saying they sent it more than two weeks ago!!! The court should have my application in the stack AND THEY DONT!. That's the issue. Samiam is correct, applications should be recorded when received by the court without exception. 

So who pays for all the lost notorized documents? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, marlintag said:

The clerk was called twice and checked twice, there is no receipt of my application. PD said they sent it more than two weeks ago. I spoke with the court twice and PD once, I got no answer. 

The difference between your experience and mine is that in your case the PD may not have sent it yet when you called the clerk. My case is very different and more concerning, the PD is saying they sent it more than two weeks ago!!! The court should have my application in the stack AND THEY DONT!. That's the issue. Samiam is correct, applications should be recorded when received by the court without exception. 

You are absolutely correct that applications should be recorded when received. 
 

in other situations, Important papers are filed electronically as PDFs and the court’s docketing system makes an automatic record of what was filed and when. 
 

 The Directive mandates that a list of carry permit applications, including. The date received by the court, must be kept. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bushmaster1313 said:

Worked for me and then my money order was cashed by Middlesex a week later.

Like it or not, Judges' chambers are very busy places and very thinly staffed.  It would be highly unusual if the deluge of post Bruen carry permit applications did not cause sizeable delays.  

And to say it is the Judges' own fault is not fair.  Until Bruen Judges were bound by their Oath of Office to follow New Jersey Supreme Court precedent--and they did. 

u r far too kind or too naive to believe that its not the judges fault. they knew it was coming and even if they didnt. we are well over 60 past this new ruling, they couldve easily revised their process of approving the permits. 

judges do not need to be involved anymore since there is no case to be presented to them and they are issuing them anywway. 

they could easily excuse themselves from it and let the PDs handle it. so many things can be done to get this nonesense resolved and get people their permits. instead they are fucking around and wasting time scheduling in person meetings and adding some illegal restrictions that goes against statue and code and law all together because "they can"

  • Like 2
  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, marlintag said:

The clerk was called twice and checked twice, there is no receipt of my application. PD said they sent it more than two weeks ago. I spoke with the court twice and PD once, I got no answer. 

The difference between your experience and mine is that in your case the PD may not have sent it yet when you called the clerk. My case is very different and more concerning, the PD is saying they sent it more than two weeks ago!!! The court should have my application in the stack AND THEY DONT!. That's the issue. Samiam is correct, applications should be recorded when received by the court without exception. 

Not different, it’s almost verbatim my situation. Pd sent mine to court July 18th I called 19’days later they said the didn’t have it. Received the permit 13 days later. I was anxious as well but I told myself not to freak out until 60 days expired. The PD makes copies(at least Manchester pd did. Just call them, but my gut tells me you will have it soon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • In a ruling that had both proponents and opponents of the Second Amendment do a curious double take, a federal judge has ruled that an illegal immigrant was wrongly banned from possessing firearms. U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman ruled on March 8 that the defendant, Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, who is residing in the United States illegally, had his Second Amendment right’s violated when prosecutors originally charged him with 18 U.S.C § 922, which bars illegal immigrants from carrying guns or ammunition. “The noncitizen possession statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), violates the Second Amendment as applied to Carbajal-Flores,” Judge Coleman wrote in her ruling. “Thus, the court grants Carbajal-Flores’ motion to dismiss.” The defense team for Mr. Carbajal-Flores had argued in their recent motion that the government could not show the law referenced was “part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.” In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that the government must show that each regulation “is consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” The precise wording of the high court’s decision was enough for the defense to argue successfully in favor of dismissal. “Lifetime disarmament of an individual based on alienage or nationality alone does not have roots in the history and tradition of the United States,” Mr. Carbajal-Flores’ lawyers said. “The government argues that Carbajal-Flores is a noncitizen who is unlawfully present in this country. The court notes, however, that Carbajal-Flores has never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon. Even in the present case, Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020,” Judge Coleman wrote. The ruling has promoted a large range of reactions across the legal and Second Amendment community. Writing on The Reload, attorney Matthew Larosiere agreed with the decision saying that even those in the country illegally are part of “the people” the Framer’s mention in the Second Amendment. “To find that illegal immigrants are outside of ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment, you must believe that the Framers were talking about a different ‘people’ in the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments,” he wrote. What Say You.....
    • Get rid of 'em all!
    • They get by with a little help from their friends. Like five years of increase. Here are the Republicans that voted to raise New Jersey's gas tax (nj1015.com)
    • So...  1) The CNJFO didn't exist back then. IT is currently operated by people who were just as angered by the dysfunctional spate of 2a advocacy groups NJ has been saddled with since the 91 AWB. There existence seems to have ushered in cooperation and coordination at both the state level and with national entities.  2) The ANJRPC isn't the turd of an organization it used to be. It genuinely seemed to exist solely to waste everyone's time while the NRA mothership used us to drive fundraising elsewhere. It seems to have moved away from that.  Currently I give to those two groups locally, and to FPC, GOA, and SAF nationally. Although I have to say that SAF is on the bubble. They do good work, but are way too comfortable chipping away slowly at things on a single front.  Basically I set aside the price of a case of ammo each year. Around Christmas they each get $25. Then hand out the rest of the funds as I see things I want to back and or fight. 
    • Unless I'm reading things wrong, I believe we can carry almost anywhere.  I think our glass is more than half full. 
×
×
  • Create New...