« Comment on 14th Amendment cases | Main | IL Supreme Court on Lawful Protection of Commerce Act »
Charges against X-Caliber Guns dismissed
This is a strange case. The Arizona Attorney General (not ATF) brought State charges against a Phoenix-area gun dealer, claiming he'd supplied over 700 guns to Mexican drug cartels.
And the AG loses on a directed verdict -- meaning the judge finds that the evidence is nonexistent: no rational juror could find for the prosecution.
And then the AG's office says it will appeal. ???? Ever hear of double jeopardy? He was on trial, jeopardy clearly attached by any standard (I forget the AZ rule, but jeopardy usually attaches when the jury is empanelled or when the first witness begins testimony, and a motion for DV is made when the prosecution finishes its case, much later), and he can't be retried.
UPDATE: here's the ruling, in pdf. The State charges were under the "scheme or artifice" statute, and the court says that materiality is a requirement there (in the typical case, that it was something where if the person knew the truth they'd not buy, or otherwise would act differently), and the court notes that the prosecution was unable to prove a single gun wound up in the hands of someone who couldn't legally possess it. Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence.
Hat tip to Practical Tactical....
Comments
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/arizona_in_the_cross_hairs.html
Somebody ought to tell George Will he's barking up the wrong tree.
Posted by: RKV at March 19, 2009 10:46 AM
Laffo... Was watching the local news last night and they were talking about this. Apparently the "reporters" haven't yet heard that there's no evidence against this guy, because the "report" was awfully accusatory. Even featured a line something like "these assault rifles were used in some of the most brutal murders of the mexican drug wars."
Posted by: cory at March 19, 2009 01:00 PM
"Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence."
Sigh ...
Posted by: Carl in Chicago at March 19, 2009 01:43 PM
Well, all that hokey "rights" stuff may not be incorporated, but it's clear the Fourth Estate is.
Posted by: WP Zeller at March 19, 2009 02:37 PM
David,
One thing to remember is that while the state AG's office was the actual prosecuting agency in this case, the ATF was heavily involved. Makes one wonder why, if the owner did what he was accused of, the ATF didn't go after them for violating federal firearm law violations.
Posted by: Tim Weaver at March 19, 2009 02:45 PM
I'm very curious what the theory of the prosecution was. What evidence did they present which they considered sufficient for a conviction? The prosecution's theory and evidence was apparently good enough to get some of the guy's co-defendants to plead guilty to felonies.
Posted by: Critic at March 19, 2009 03:04 PM
"Sounds like a pretty big gap between press reports and the evidence."
Wow; there's a first time for everything!
Posted by: Kirk Parker at March 20, 2009 01:36 PM
Rights? You don't have no steenkin' rights! I have an agenda to pursue here!
Posted by: Random Numbes at March 20, 2009 05:12 PM