Looking for case law

[kis312]

I have been searching Google for hours and coming up empty; hoping someone out there can help out.

I am trying to find information regarding a case where a man lost his firearm rights but because he /did not/ go to jail he fell into a 'lifetime ban' category whereas someone who committed a similar offense /went to jail/ and afterwards had his firearm rights restored. When appealed the Court said that a man who never went to jail surely can not have less rights than a man who went to jail.

Further, I'm trying to find information about Pennsylvania allowing firearm licenses even if federally prohibited as long as the firearm was manufactured, delivered, sold and owned within the Commonwealth.

Forgive me for being so vague, these are recollections that I have but don't have any proof and may quite possibly have drempt.

[ChemicalReaper]

WestLaw and Lexis are the best databases for searching case law, but they're very expensive. You could use Google (etc.), but using internet search engines may be unreliable in that it may turn up outdated or overturned precedent.

[jerkin]

You should change your search terms to "Pennsylvania governor's pardon" I think you'll get better results.

[Sshuker]

The Montco Law Library used to let you use Westlaw free.

They still may, it has just been about 8 years since I used it, so I do not want anyone to rely on my recollection.

I have used it at the Chester County Law Library more recently, but that was still about 3 years ago.

[GunLawyer001]

I have been searching Google for hours and coming up empty; hoping someone out there can help out.

I am trying to find information regarding a case where a man lost his firearm rights but because he /did not/ go to jail he fell into a 'lifetime ban' category whereas someone who committed a similar offense /went to jail/ and afterwards had his firearm rights restored. When appealed the Court said that a man who never went to jail surely can not have less rights than a man who went to jail.

Further, I'm trying to find information about Pennsylvania allowing firearm licenses even if federally prohibited as long as the firearm was manufactured, delivered, sold and owned within the Commonwealth.

Forgive me for being so vague, these are recollections that I have but don't have any proof and may quite possibly have drempt.

Not sure what you mean by the first part; loss of rights due to criminal convictions doesn't factor in the actual sentence. Getting your rights back before you turn 70 or die requires a pardon and expungement, in most cases. And what counts as a "similar offense" is open to debate.

The concept in your second part is not going to prevail. For most of the last century, the USSC has held that the Commerce Clause gives the Feds carte blanche to regulate anything that AFFECTS interstate commerce, meaning that guns made from PA ore using PA machinery and PA workers will "have an impact" on the market for guns sold in interstate commerce. Look at Wickard v. Filburn, where a farmer growing a crop for on-site consumption by his family was still held to "affect" interstate commerce, because he could stop buying that from other markets:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/317/111

[GunLawyer001]

You can also use "Google Scholar", separate from regular Google, and search the PA Appellate Court opinions (select "case law" and then PA courts):

http://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en&tab=ws

[Democrat Gun Owner]

To the OP's second scenario of firearms manufactured and sold within a single state being exempt from federal laws, it's not PA, but...

Montana tried it in 2009 with the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. The ATF stepped in and basically stated, nice try, but federal law trumps state law. A few firearm groups filed suit. They had their lawsuit thrown out by the courts. All their appeals, thus far, have been denied. I am not sure they have exhausted all appeals, but their prospects of success seem dismal at best.

[fairweather]

You can also use "Google Scholar", separate from regular Google, and search the PA Appellate Court opinions (select "case law" and then PA courts):

http://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en&tab=ws

Thank you for this.

[kis312]

The concept in your second part is not going to prevail. For most of the last century, the USSC has held that the Commerce Clause gives the Feds [I]carte

thanks for your reply. In using Google Scholar I found US v Lewitzke (which is not the case I was originally looking for). But inside, it says that pursuant to 18 USC 922g:

it was unlawful for Lewitzke to possess a firearm which has moved in interstate commerce; and a grand jury issued a one-count indictment charging him with that offense. The parties later stipulated that each of the guns seized from Lewitzke's home was manufactured outside the state of Wisconsin and consequently had been transported in interstate commerce prior to June 1997. R. 96 at 125.

18 U.S.C 922g:

It shall be unlawful for any person–
[...]
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or
affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any
firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in
interstate or foreign commerce.

Does this mean that 922g does rely on such "interstate" vs "made/sold/transported" within the state distinction ? I read what you wrote about the USSC giving the Feds 'carte blanche' wrt commerce; i just don't understand both parties in Lewitzke stipulating interstate if the issue is settled.

[kis312]

Montana tried it in 2009 with the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. The ATF

Yes, that was it. I didnt remember it all being Montana. Thank you.