NAPPEN LAW FIRM WINS

SECOND AMENDMENT CASE !

1ST TIME NJ HIGHER COURT HAS EXPRESSLY APPLIED RKBA

 

 

For the first time in New Jersey legal history, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court has applied the U.S. Constitution’s 2nd Amendment Right to “Keep and Bear Arms” to order the return of an individual’s seized firearms and gun license. The decision was made in the case of IN RE APPLICATION OF JUSTIN BLASKO FOR THE RETURN OF FIREARMS. The case was argued on appeal by the law firm of Evan F. Nappen, Attorney at Law P.C. of Eatontown, NJ. The 33 page formal brief was written by Louis P. Nappen, Esq. in which every point of argument raised on appeal was affirmed by the Court in its decision. The Appellate Court stated:

 

“Blasko asserts he is permitted to have his weapons readily accessible within the confines of his home, and argues the trial judge erroneously ordered forfeiture solely because his weapons were not stored and locked. He maintains the trial decision wrongly limits his Second Amendment rights by creating a de facto rule, in the name of public safety, which requires a private citizen lawfully possessing firearms to store the weapons in a specific manner. Relying on the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller…, Blasko emphasizes the State may not dictate the storage of firearms. In Heller, following an exhaustive analysis of the history of the Second Amendment and the rights regarding firearms, the United State Supreme Court held "the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense." Two years later in McDonald v. City of Chicago, …, the Court ended all doubt by declaring "the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States …Despite a preference for the safe storage of weapons with safety locks, we conclude a law abiding adult, living alone without children, who openly leaves weapons in a locked apartment, insufficiently supports a findingof conduct contrary to the interest of the public health, safety or welfare pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3c(5). See Heller, …(holding "the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment")”

 

http://www.evannappen.com/uploads/1/0/8/0/1080251/blasco.pdf

Whoopee!

so nothing changes....

why can't someone sue state for shotguns with pistol grips based on ADA (americans with disabilities act).

So if the case had gone the other way, we would have had a legal mandate to keep our guns in a safe or otherwise secured?

In NJ we have to strike with the hammer and the anvil. Lawsuits create precedence. We have tried to vote the bums out but that creates two more problems. One is most don't vote and second we usual have two anti gun bums to choose from.

Anthony has got it - you guys are missing the point, it is not about this specific case. This is precedent setting. For the first time a NJ court has used the Heller/McDonald decisions to decide a case. This opens a whole new door and a potential avenue for redress. This, indeed, is good news.

 

JMHO

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Anthony has got it - you guys are missing the point, it is not about this specific case. This is precedent setting. For the first time a NJ court has used the Heller/McDonald decisions to decide a case. This opens a whole new door and a potential avenue for redress. This, indeed, is good news.

 

JMHO

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

I have been talking about this with Nappen for the past three weeks and we know that having this precedent is a HUGE game changer. I know we are all beat down to nothing in NJ with regards to our 2A rights but right here we have something we can use for many lawsuits to come!

In the NJ CCW case, didn't the court use McDonald and Heller as a cause for dismissal. The judge's interpretation was that McDonald and Heller implies that the R2KBA does not apply to outside the home.

 

For the evil NJ courts to use that excuse in further rulings, they MUST admit that McDonald and Heller allows for the R2KBA to apply in the home by default. So really they are just promulgating that interpretation.

 

At least they admit that the R2KBA does exist, and it does extend to the States. Now we just need SCOTUS to rule that 2A does also apply also to outside the home. Its ludicrous to think that a Constitutional Right would only apply in one's home, but unfortunately these nanny-state anti-2A rights judges need that sort of wack on the back of the head.

Good news Ant, thanks for keeping us updated.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Way to go Evan & team!

Thanks for the good word.

 

Let's hope this is the first step of many in the right direction.

this is great news for Justin !!

In addition to removing the alligator, a boa constrictor, a

steel jaw leg hold trap, a bow and arrow, knives, a flak jacket,

certain books, liquid steroids, drug paraphernalia, and a

Passaic Housing Inspection Badge, the following weaponry was

seized:...

 

Blasko was issued a summons for unlawful possession of the

steel jaw leg hold trap, the snake, and the alligator, and, also

issued a complaint for the unlawful possession of an assault

rifle, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(f). Blasko was admitted

to the county's pre-trial intervention (PTI) program without a

plea. Following his successful completion of PTI, all charges

were dismissed.

 

Thereafter, Blasko petitioned for the return of his

property. The State opposed the return of the weapons,

maintaining Blasko's conduct made him unfit to possess firearms.

Specifically, the State argued Blasko was drug dependent,

relying on his admission of past marijuana use and the seizure

of straws laced with cocaine residue, liquid steroids and

hypodermic needles.

 

 

Wow. And on another thread people are denied FID by their local police for an arrest with no conviction.

this is just the beginning, I see change coming in nj...

An FYI, the "assault" weapon in question turned out to be a single stack WASR out of the box from Meltzers, and the "silenced" weapon in question was a GSG5, (the PD thought the barrel shroud was a silencer)

In addition to removing the alligator, a boa constrictor, a

steel jaw leg hold trap, a bow and arrow, knives, a flak jacket,

certain books, liquid steroids, drug paraphernalia, and a

Passaic Housing Inspection Badge, the following weaponry was

seized:...

 

Blasko was issued a summons for unlawful possession of the

steel jaw leg hold trap, the snake, and the alligator, and, also

issued a complaint for the unlawful possession of an assault

rifle, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(f). Blasko was admitted

to the county's pre-trial intervention (PTI) program without a

plea. Following his successful completion of PTI, all charges

were dismissed.

 

Thereafter, Blasko petitioned for the return of his

property. The State opposed the return of the weapons,

maintaining Blasko's conduct made him unfit to possess firearms.

Specifically, the State argued Blasko was drug dependent,

relying on his admission of past marijuana use and the seizure

of straws laced with cocaine residue, liquid steroids and

hypodermic needles.

 

 

Wow. And on another thread people are denied FID by their local police for an arrest with no conviction.

 

All charges were dismissed. He did not have a NJ defined "assault weapon", and they did not press charges on the drug paraphernalia or steroids for whatever reason.

 

This guy does sound like a nutjob, and the State should have pushed for the drug stuff. Instead they decided that he was too creepy to own guns and that they would not give them or his FID back. Sorry, even creepy people have rights, and as long as they don't hurt anyone and follow the laws, they should be unhindered in their exercise of them.

All charges were dismissed. He did not have a NJ defined "assault weapon", and they did not press charges on the drug paraphernalia or steroids for whatever reason.

 

This guy does sound like a nutjob, and the State should have pushed for the drug stuff. Instead they decided that he was too creepy to own guns and that they would not give them or his FID back. Sorry, even creepy people have rights, and as long as they don't hurt anyone and follow the laws, they should be unhindered in their exercise of them.

 

I thought it was funny the way the court listed out all the bizarre stuff starting with a 4-foot alligator. What are the odds one of the "certain books" was the Anarchist's Cookbook.

You climb a mountain by hand holds and foot holes. This was way more then a hold, this is a base camp where further assents can depart from.

 

The horribly evil Anarchist's Cookbook. Before Al Gore invented the internet, that was the go to place to find ways into the ER. Now with the internet, the Kramer Jihadists and other anarchists can really prove Darwin right.

What are the odds one of the "certain books" was the Anarchist's Cookbook.

 

I would have thought it was Evan Nappen's book...

Just wondering about the SAF lawsuit and if anyone knows why the defendants are named "in their capacity as" what ever title they are and why they are not named personally, They are the ones denying ones civil rights so should be named as citizens just as the police officers who were charged in the rodney king trial. If these people had to pay for their crimes than maybe they wouldn't be so fast to deny permits. also would the SAF have to amend the suit since their is a new AG.