Handyman 5,682 Posted March 20, 2014 So their position is that the court is too busy to take the case further? Brilliant.... There are a lot of overworked people in this world. I don't usually count judges among them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted March 20, 2014 So their position is that the court is too busy to take the case further? Brilliant.... It's just one brief from an outside party. I think it is a good reason not to take an en banc appeal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raz-0 1,259 Posted March 20, 2014 So their position is that the court is too busy to take the case further? Brilliant.... No, their position is that if they hear it en banc, one of tow things will happen. 1)They will side with the state, in which case Peruta's side will appeal to SCOTUS. 2)They will Side with Peruta, in which case the state can and likely will appeal to SCOTUS. If they don't hear it en banc, the state may or may not appeal to SCOTUS as they see fit. Given that, there is ZERO reason to hear it en banc according to the filer as either way SCOTUS has to make the decision anyway or the verdict stands as is. As a benefit, he argues that the court can get on with other cases and reduce their total pending workload. It's nice, but it is not true. Eliminating the decision would eliminate a clear well defined split amongst circuit courts, possibly helping ot keep the issue of SCOTUS radar forever as there is little liklihood of the issue creeping up in other circuits anytime soon. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NicePants 58 Posted March 20, 2014 So when is SCOTUS going to decide if they hear Drake or one of the other cases? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted March 20, 2014 So when is SCOTUS going to decide if they hear Drake or one of the other cases? Likely in the April to June timeframe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted March 21, 2014 The earliest is the 28th, but that will probably not happen. Could be as early as April 4 or the 18th. The Court does not meet on the 11th. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chris327 30 Posted June 12, 2014 anyone have any updates on the Peruta case? is the state fighting the ruling? should we expect to see it apply for scotus cert? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted June 12, 2014 "it's complicated."Basically California AG Kamala Harris had filed a motion to intervene and be a party in the case. Sheriff Gore had decided that he's out of the case and even refused to answer the court. Brady campaign also filed for a motion to intervene to be a party in the case. Kamala Harris has also asked if the case could be reheard en banc (full court hears the case, instead of just 3 judge panel). The court asked Peruta's attorneys and Gore to write a brief in support or against the motions to intervene. Sheriff Gore initially did not respond to the court. He wants nothing to do with this. The Court ordered him a second time to write a response. He wrote one saying that the AG would be appropriate to intervene. That was on 5/14. Nothing has happened since. Your guess is as good as mine but theories are that the opinion will stand. Let's cross our fingers and hope it does. The 9th circuit has a webpage dedicated to Peruta with the briefs: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000722 Attorneys Michel and Associates also has a page with that info plus a few other things: http://michellawyers.com/guncasetracker/perutavsandiego/ So right now we are waiting for the court to decide on the motion to intervene and rehearing en banc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chris327 30 Posted June 12, 2014 thanks ryan. I figured you would know and follow it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrappy 0 Posted July 22, 2014 Has there been any update on this? Any word on en banc? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted July 23, 2014 Trust me, if there was something you'd know. I would post it here and on Facebook. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raz-0 1,259 Posted July 23, 2014 The 9th's record for tying stuff up is 10 or 12 years, soooo... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted July 24, 2014 The 9th's record for tying stuff up is 10 or 12 years, soooo... Yep. Nordyke was tied up for 10+ years. They may move quicker on this one though. lol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CMJeepster 2,778 Posted August 1, 2014 "California battle over concealed-weapon rights could be headed for Supreme Court" http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/31/california-concealed-weapon/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted August 3, 2014 I have a feeling we'll hear something soon, given that Palmer relied heavily on the reasoning in Peruta. Some are suggesting that the motion to intervene and en banc petitions may have been decided, but the court hasn't issued them yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n4p226r 105 Posted August 3, 2014 are these "some that are suggesting" people with actual knowledge? or people like me who think that these cases are decided day 1. and it just takes 10 years for them to figure out how to write it in a way to make them look smart? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryan_j 0 Posted August 3, 2014 are these "some that are suggesting" people with actual knowledge? or people like me who think that these cases are decided day 1. and it just takes 10 years for them to figure out how to write it in a way to make them look smart? One or two are attorneys who practice appellate law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CMJeepster 2,778 Posted June 9, 2016 http://www.njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/81973-a-sad-day-for-california/#entry1046034 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites