Man arrested for having gun on school property

[mrjam2jab]

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

No. She was never charged.

and yet she was the one actually in possession of the gun..."on school property"....

Is something wrong with this picture?

[mjf]

Originally Posted by mrjam2jab

and yet she was the one actually in possession of the gun..."on school property"....

Is something wrong with this picture?

They clearly didn't like that guy...

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by PocketProtector

Then you would think, they check for LTCF, he complies, everyone goes home.

Well, not really. As gnbrotz mentioned, Heidler was ultimately decided on constructive possession. The issue of carrying legally ("for other lawful purpose") was not included in the decision, so I think that case varies fro this one enough to make it only slightly relevant.

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

Umm...no. Police show up, I decline to have a conversation, end of story. Hawkins establishes that a "report of a gun" is not RAS for a Terry Stop..

Yeah, but that is report of a mwag on a public street. Not a (presumed) prohibited place. I'm not sure it matters but I would not assume that ruling would necessarily apply to a school or other prohibited place.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

Hawkins establishes that a "report of a gun" is not RAS for a Terry Stop.

hawkins only clearly establishes that an *anonymous* tip is not RAS. it leaves up in the air whether or not a tip from a known source who is trusted by the police would establish RAS--it just doesn't really address that issue.

[ANTHONY03]

Willow Grove man attending an adult education class at the North Montco Technical Career Center class was arrested Monday for bringing a weapon onto school property.

Towamencin police said Christopher Anfuso, 40, had a permit to carry a firearm but it was illegal for him to have the gun on school property, police said. Police said Anfuso had a semiautomatic pistol with a loaded magazine in his vehicle.

Police said Anfuso had told another student about the gun, triggering an investigation by school authorities, who then contacted police.

No threat to use the firearm or other threat of violence was reported, police said

[gnbrotz]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

Yeah, but that is report of a mwag on a public street. Not a (presumed) prohibited place. I'm not sure it matters but I would not assume that ruling would necessarily apply to a school or other prohibited place.

So if YOU were approached by LE while on school grounds, and they said someone had reported you were in possession of a firearm:

1. Would you consent to a search of your person?

2. Would you expect to be searched even if you did not give consent?

3. Do you believe they would have the legal right to search (absent consent) in that situation?

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

Yeah, but that is report of a mwag on a public street. Not a (presumed) prohibited place.

hawkins was concealing the gun in philly. so, his conduct was generally prohibited by law but with exceptions. same as carrying on school property. so, i think, from that regard, hawkins is still relevant.

however, the tip in hawkins was anonymous (and the opinion makes a relatively big deal of that)...the tip in this case, from what i can tell, was not anonymous. imho, that is the key difference.

[gnbrotz]

Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota

hawkins only clearly establishes that an *anonymous* tip is not RAS. it leaves up in the air whether or not a tip from a known source who is trusted by the police would establish RAS--it just doesn't really address that issue.

So where would a caller who actually identified himself, but was not a CI or known to the police fall into the equation (in your estimation)?

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

So if YOU were approached by LE while on school grounds, and they said someone had reported you were in possession of a firearm:

1. Would you consent to a search of your person?

no.

2. Would you expect to be searched even if you did not give consent?

yes.

3. Do you believe they would have the legal right to search (absent consent) in that situation?

if i were the judge, no. but i would, if the report was not anonymous, expect the courts to (incorrectly, imho) rule that they do have that right.

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

So if YOU were approached by LE while on school grounds, and they said someone had reported you were in possession of a firearm:

1. Would you consent to a search of your person?

2. Would you expect to be searched even if you did not give consent?

3. Do you believe they would have the legal right to search (absent consent) in that situation?

I would not consent and I have no idea what to expect. I never know what to expect when dealing with the police because they are very inconsistent.

My point was that I do not think hawkins *necessarily* means such a search would or would not be found legal in court as the circumstances are different.