how do you challenge a decission for concealed to carry

[rab4116]

I was 302 when I was a minor by my parents. I as there for 3 days and was let out because there was no reason to keep. this is now preventing me from getting my concealed to carry permit. I sent a letter to the state police and they confirmed the reason for denial was due to being 302. Does anyone have any advice on how to challenge the decision from here.

[Daycrawler]

First get a lawyer! That is about the only way you will be able to fight through all the red tape! Even then a lawyer may be no help in a 302 situation. Second might be going to a phycologist (< sp) and have the Doc prove that you are no longer a danger to youself or others! Either way could end in failure, good luck!

[SigForLife]

First off, given what you state, the denial was appropriate given the law, assuming that it was an involuntary commitment. The first step is determining what happened back then and whether the law was complied with for the 302. If the 302 was involuntary and lawful, then your only option is to file for relief from your firearms disability. If you don't currently have any psychological problems and a psychiatrist will state that you do not pose a threat to yourself or others, you will likely have your petition approved.

[rmodel65]

what is 302?? i have a 302 in my ford

[MDJschool]

what is 302?? i have a 302 in my ford

http://www.pitt.edu/~mercyres/302-forms.pdf

18 pacs 6105 (c) Other persons.--In addition to any person who has been convicted of any offense listed under subsection (b), the following persons shall be subject to the prohibition of subsection (a):
(4) A person who has been adjudicated as an incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care and treatment under section 302, 303 or 304 of the provisions of the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L. 817, No. 143), [FN2] known as the Mental Health Procedures Act. This paragraph shall not apply to any proceeding under section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act unless the examining physician has issued a certification that inpatient care was necessary or that the person was committable.

It looks like "the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L.817, No.143), known as the Mental Health Procedures Act, amended July 2, 1996 (P.L.481, No.77)" is codified around 50 P.S. § 7101 et seq. Section 302 of the original act is codified at 50 P.S. § 7302:

§ 7302. Involuntary emergency examination and treatment authorized by a physician--not to exceed one hundred twenty hours
Currentness
(a) Application for Examination.--Emergency examination may be undertaken at a treatment facility upon the certification of a physician stating the need for such examination; or upon a warrant issued by the county administrator authorizing such examination; or without a warrant upon application by a physician or other authorized person who has personally observed conduct showing the need for such examination.
(1) Warrant for Emergency Examination.--Upon written application by a physician or other responsible party setting forth facts constituting reasonable grounds to believe a person is severely mentally disabled and in need of immediate treatment, the county administrator may issue a warrant requiring a person authorized by him, or any peace officer, to take such person to the facility specified in the warrant.
(2) Emergency Examination Without a Warrant.--Upon personal observation of the conduct of a person constituting reasonable grounds to believe that he is severely mentally disabled and in need of immediate treatment, and physician or peace officer, or anyone authorized by the county administrator may take such person to an approved facility for an emergency examination. Upon arrival, he shall make a written statement setting forth the grounds for believing the person to be in need of such examination.
(b) Examination and Determination of Need for Emergency Treatment.--A person taken to a facility shall be examined by a physician within two hours of arrival in order to determine if the person is severely mentally disabled within the meaning of section 3011 and in need of immediate treatment. If it is determined that the person is severely mentally disabled and in need of emergency treatment, treatment shall be begun immediately. If the physician does not so find, or if at any time it appears there is no longer a need for immediate treatment, the person shall be discharged and returned to such place as he may reasonably direct. The physician shall make a record of the examination and his findings. In no event shall a person be accepted for involuntary emergency treatment if a previous application was granted for such treatment and the new application is not based on behavior occurring after the earlier application.
(c) Notification of Rights at Emergency Examination.--Upon arrival at the facility, the person shall be informed of the reasons for emergency examination and of his right to communicate immediately with others. He shall be given reasonable use of the telephone. He shall be requested to furnish the names of parties whom he may want notified of his custody and kept informed of his status. The county administrator or the director of the facility shall:
(1) give notice to such parties of the whereabouts and status of the person, how and when he may be contacted and visited, and how they may obtain information concerning him while he is in inpatient treatment; and
(2) take reasonable steps to assure that while the person is detained, the health and safety needs of any of his dependents are met, and that his personal property and the premises he occupies are secure.
(d) Duration of Emergency Examination and Treatment.--A person who is in treatment pursuant to this section shall be discharged whenever it is determined that he no longer is in need of treatment and in any event within 120 hours, unless within such period:
(1) he is admitted to voluntary treatment pursuant to section 202 of this act;2 or
(2) a certification for extended involuntary emergency treatment is filed pursuant to section 303 of this act.3
Credits
1976, July 9, P.L. 817, No. 143, § 302, effective in 60 days. Amended 1978, Nov. 26, P.L. 1362, No. 324, § 1, effective in 60 days.


OASN: check out this failed bill:
http://www2.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/L...B0531P0579.pdf

[MDJschool]

I sent a letter to the state police and they confirmed the reason for denial was due to being 302. Does anyone have any advice on how to challenge the decision from here.

Start here:
http://reference.pafoa.org/statutes/...sfer-firearms/

18 pa.c.s. 6105(f) Other exemptions and proceedings.--
(1) Upon application to the court of common pleas under this subsection by an applicant subject to the prohibitions under subsection (c)(4), the court may grant such relief as it deems appropriate if the court determines that the applicant may possess a firearm without risk to the applicant or any other person.
(3) All hearings conducted under this subsection shall be closed unless otherwise requested to be open by the applicant.

18 pa.c.s. 6105(c) Other persons.--In addition to any person who has been convicted of any offense listed under subsection (b), the following persons shall be subject to the prohibition of subsection (a):
(4) A person who has been adjudicated as an incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care and treatment under section 302, 303 or 304 of the provisions of the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L. 817, No. 143), [FN2] known as the Mental Health Procedures Act. This paragraph shall not apply to any proceeding under section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act unless the examining physician has issued a certification that inpatient care was necessary or that the person was committable.

Finding a lawyer who has experience with applying for relief of firearms disabilities because of prior alleged mental health issues is good advice. As far as knowing what the procedure is, as to evaluate any lawyer you potentially want to hire to test their knowledge and competence or to go it alone, I will see if I can find some cases that describe it in the abstract. Hopefully someone who has gone through the motions can describe the physical procedure (footwork) as it moves through a local court.

[SigForLife]

The physical procedures are going to depend on the Court. 99% of the courts have no idea that Relief from Firearms Disability exists, let alone, how to docket it and schedule it. The best way to proceed is to hire an attorney who knows the process and what is required, so that the attorney can contact the PSP and its attorney, prior to filing any petitions, determine if the PSP or its attorney have any objections, (if so, and if possible, resolve them) and then file the petition. Assuming that all parties can agree to the petition, then the Court will rubber-stamp the Order because all parties are in agreement. If there is disagreement, it is going to require hearing, with expert testimony.

[MDJschool]

The physical procedures are going to depend on the Court. 99% of the courts have no idea that Relief from Firearms Disability exists, let alone, how to docket it and schedule it. The best way to proceed is to hire an attorney who knows the process and what is required, so that the attorney can contact the PSP and its attorney, prior to filing any petitions, determine if the PSP or its attorney have any objections, (if so, and if possible, resolve them) and then file the petition. Assuming that all parties can agree to the petition, then the Court will rubber-stamp the Order because all parties are in agreement. If there is disagreement, it is going to require hearing, with expert testimony.

I'm not sure how you could say that an attorney could know the process and what is required when 99% of the courts don't (how many attorneys could have possibly been before those 0.6 courts that did have any idea?) I like your suggestion (for most cases, because I'm not certain 100% of the cases should involve asking the PSP first), and I was wondering (because of your sig) whether you are part of Prince's law office or just suggest him for whatever his primary practice areas are (I see a link in your profile points to http://www.pafirearmslawyer.com which states that Prince's office has lawyers who deal with "Relief from Firearms Disabilities Representation".)

EDIT: nevermind, you seem to be joshua prince. I was asking for the purpose of applying that credibility to your post, like that which gets attached to other known lawyer's posts like those of GunLawyer001, Rule10b5, etc.

[SigForLife]

You are correct, I am Joshua Prince and I have experience handling Relief from Firearms Disability petitions. That's why I know that the Courts don't know what to do with them. Involving the PSP and its attorney from the start is extremely beneficial, since it makes everything easy on the court, plus usually saves the client money, as the parties can usually resolve the issues beforehand without a hearing.