CASE LAW UPDATE: Whether in this carrying without a permit case the trial court erred in failing to strike a juror sua sponte for bias?
Defendant was convicted of carrying a pistol without a permit. In Minnesota, before a person can legally carry a pistol in public said person has to obtain a permit to carry from the local Sheriff’s Office. The standard of whether the application will be granted is whether there would be a substantial likelihood that the person would be a danger to the public if allowed to carry a pistol in public. The Sheriff makes that determination. If the Sheriff denies the application, the person can take an appeal to the trial court. The court then applies that statutory test. If a person carries a pistol in public without a permit to carry, the defendant t is subject to criminal prosecution. A violation is punished at the gross misdemeanor level for a first offense, and, a felony level for a second offense. Arguably, this punishment for engaging in pure Second Amendment behavior is unconstitutional, and the United States Supreme Court needs to strike this statute down as unconstitutional. In the instant case, defendant appealed. his conviction. On appeal, he argued that he was entitled to a new trial on the grounds that the trial court erred by failing to strike a juror sua sponte for bias. Sua sponte means on the trial court’s own motion. Because defendant failed to bring forth a cause challenge to the juror in the trial court, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the question of whether the trial court erred by failing to strike the juror sua sponte was not properly before it. Affirmed.
State v. Collins, A19-1277, Hennepin County.
Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.