Reply to AG Graves: DC Appeals Court reversing 75% of gun possession cases

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "AG Graves: DC Appeals Court reversing 75% of gun possession cases"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It's useful to look at individual case to see what's going on. For instance, look at this case:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/08/25/dc-murder-gun-case-dropped/

Police find a group of men huddled around a parking lot in a dangerous area at 1 am. They approach them, asking if they're armed. When they reach them, they see they were playing a dice gambling game on the ground of the parking lot. They search the men, one is found with an illegal gun, and goes to court.

The judge says that because the police asked if the men were armed when they approached them, they have to throw the whole case out, so the man walks free. Two days later, he murders someone.

The judge in the case is Sean Staples. Like many (all?) judges that end up on the bunch in D.C., he's nominated by the D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission. Here's where the members of the commission come from:

- President of the United States (1 lawyer member)
- Mayor of the District of Columbia (2 members, one  must be a non-lawyer)
- District of Columbia Council (1 non-lawyer member)
- Chief Judge, US District Court for the District of Columbia (federal judge)
- DC Bar (2 lawyer members)

So most members are coming from D.C. itself, with almost half from D.C. elected officials. After the recommendation, the President makes a decision about which of the nominees to officially nominate (from my understanding, at least), and it goes to the Senate for approval.[/quote]

Take another step back.

Judge Sean Staples ruled that way because the DC Court of Appeals - composed of judges appointed by Trump, Obama, and GW Bush - have made the burden of proof higher on cops under 4A for illegal gun possession. Judge Sean Staples HAD to rule that way in August 2023, per instruction of the higher court discussed in the WUSA9 article.

Here’s the relevant text:

[i][quote] Because D.C. is not a state, its Court of Appeals has judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents for lifetime appointments. In the case of TV v US, Judge Easterly, an Obama appointee, and Judge Deahl, a Trump appointee, and Senior Judge Thompson, a GW Bush appointee wrote the dissenting opinion. In the case of Mayo v. US, Judges Easterly and Deahl wrote the opinions while Obama appointee Judge McLeese wrote the dissenting opinion. The current makeup of the DC Court of Appeals, including senior judges, is 9 appointed by Democratic presidents and 5 appointed by Republican presidents.
….
"If you look at these opinions, most of them are what we call a split opinion and in the Court of Appeals, there’s usually multiple judges that hear it," Graves said. "In the DC Court of Appeals, it’s three and these opinions are two in favor of the new rule and one defending the actions of the government. When you look at those dissent opinions, something you will consistently see is the dissent noting they are not aware of a case in another jurisdiction that requires the outcome that the DC Court of Appeals is reaching."[/quote][/i]

Judge Staples has to follow the US Court of Appeals rulings from early 2023 and 2022. That’s why he let the gang banging defendant go free. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics