The case is currently being appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
edperuta@ctgunrights.com or edperuta@amcable.tv
Click on this Photo of the Sheriff's Sign to view a 7 min. A/V clip
THE RECENT DECISION BY THE COURT
DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACTS
In summary, this says it all
“Every resident, taxpayer and voter of San Diego County should be outraged that the Sheriff offers the right to "BEAR" arms for “SELF DEFENSE” to the prominent, wealthy and/or well connected while refusing the same right to the average everyday hard working law abiding residents of San Diego County.”
Click on the map to view the PDF for a better view
As published on Sunday November 28, 2010 in the San Diego Union Tribune
Comments on statements made by the Sheriff's Department
Most documents filed along with evidence can be found on this page
CLICK BELOW FOR RECENTLY FILED DOCUMENTS:
DOCUMENTS FILED ON SEPTEMBER 3rd and 8th, 2010
CLICK BELOW TO HEAR & VIEW:
AUDIO CLIP WITH GRAPHICS THAT SAYS IT ALL
I believe that this webpage will be viewed by members of law enforcement
including members of the San Diego Sheriff's Department,
Information on this page is for everyone to read together with audio clips & graphics which don't lie.
Listen and Read information at the links listed below
AUDIO CLIP PART 1 - November 2008 Margaret starts the interview
AUDIO CLIP PART 2 - November 2008 Donna Burns takes over the interview
AUDIO CLIP - November 2008 The decision that started this entire situation Facts regarding visits
to Sheriff's Department supported by information at these links and with other evidence available
AUDIO CLIP Initial Interview where they maintained that I was NOT a resident
12.05.08 Request to Sheriff's Department for CLARIFICATION on issues including RESIDENCY
12.09.08 Letter from Sheriff's Department regarding request of 12.05.08
02.02.09 Second Request for CLARIFICATION To Sheriff's Department
02.03.09 Snotty accusatory letter received from Sheriff's Department Attorney
02.06.09 Letter to Sheriff's Department Attorney after receipt of his hostile accusatory letter.
03.07.09 Recommendation of Millie Faiai to deny CCW by SDSO
03.16.09 Recommendation of Blanca Pelowitz to deny CCW by SDSO
03.17.09 Denial Letter from Blanca Pelowitz
03.20.09 Notice of intent to appeal the denial and a request for a hearing
03.24.09 Formal letter of appeal filed by Attorney Neuharth
04.14.09 POINT by POINT rebuttal to Sheriff's Department denial of my CCW application
AUDIO CLIP April 30. 2010 CCW Hearing where they denied my appeal regarding my CCW application
CCW INSTRUCTOR ISSUE: 11.17.09 Email documentation on attempts to have CCW course
and instructor status approved by the San Diego Sheriff's Department approved
11.19.09 Complaint filed today with County Law Enforcement Review Board and Sheriff's
12.07.09 Facts regarding the minimum requirements to received a CCW in California
DOCUMENTS FILED IN 2009
10.23.09 Federal Civil Complaint Filed
11.12.09 Cover Page for Motion to dismiss
11.12.09 Sheriff's Motion to Dismiss
11.12.09 Laws submitted with Motion
12.07.09 Opposition to Motion to Dismiss with Points and Authorities
12.14.09 Sheriff's response to Plaintiff's opposition to Motion to Dismiss
DOCUMENTS FILED IN JANUARY 2010
01.14.10 Judge's ruling on motion to dismiss (18 Page decision in PDF)
01.20.10 Defendant's answers to the complaint (received by not yet posted)
01.21.10 Court's order for Early Neutral Evaluation
DOCUMENTS FILED BY PLAINTIFF
IN APRIL 2010
04.22.10 Proposed AMENDED Complaint with additional Plaintiffs
DOCUMENTS FILED IN MAY 2010
05.12.10 Order for Settlement Conference on August 11, 2010
DOCUMENTS FILED BY PLAINTIFF
IN JUNE 2010
06.25.10 Request for Admissions
06.25.10 Request for Documents
06.25.10 Interrogatories made to San Diego Sheriff's Dept.
06.25.10 Order allowing Amended Complaint
DOCUMENTS FILED SHERIFF
IN JULY 2010
07.08.10 Joint motion for Protective Order
07.09.10 Sheriff's Department's Response to Amended
07.09.10 San Diego County Response to Amended Complaint
07.09.10 Sheriff Gore's Claims of Insufficient Information
07.14.10 Order granting Motion for Protective Order
07.27.10 Peruta Joint Discovery Plan
A Case Management Conference was held on 08/06/2010
DOCUMENTS FILED BY SHERIFF
ON AUGUST 31, 2010
08.31.10 County Response to Interrogatories and Discovery
DOCUMENTS FILED BY PLAINTIFF
ON SEPTEMBER 3, 2010
09.03.10 Joint Motion - Stipulated Briefing Schedule
09.03.10 Ex Parte Motion to file Partial MSJ Docs under Seal
09.03.10 MSJ Exhibits A - WW (Some redacted & under seal)
09.03.10 Declaration of Edward Peruta
09.03.10 Declaration of Mark Cleary
09.03.10 Declaration of Michelle Laxson
09.03.10 Declaration of James Dodd
09.03.10 Declaration of CPRA - Silvio Montanarella
09.03.10 Declaration of Attorney Sean Brady
09.03.10 MSJ Table of Contents and table of Authorities
09.03.10 Undisputed Facts with references to Evidence
09.03.10 Notice of Hearing on November 1, 2010
DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COURT
ON SEPTEMBER 8, 2010
09.08.10 Order approving motion to seal exhibits
09.08.10 Order approving expedited Briefing Schedule
DOCUMENTS FILED BY BRADY
ON OCTOBER 4, 2010
10.04.10 Brady Center Press Release re: Amicus Brief
10.04.10 Brady Center Request to file Amicus Brief
10.04.10 Brady Center Amicus Brief
DOCUMENTS FILED BY SHERIFF'S
ON OCTOBER 4, 2010
10.04.10 Sheriff Gore's Motion
10.04.10 Declaration of Pelowitz
10.14.10 Declaration of Zimring
10.04.10 Declaration of Attorney Chapin
10.04.10 Sheriff's Undisputed Facts
10.04.10 Sheriff's Opposition to Undisputed Facts
10.04.10 Sheriff's Points and Authorities & Table of Contents
10.04.10 Sheriff's Topical Index
10.04.10 Sheriff's Submission under seal
10.04.10 Sheriff's Supporting Documents
10.04.10 Sheriff's Declaration of Service
10.04.10 Sheriff's Notice of Hearing (Changed to Nov. 15th)
DOCUMENTS FILED BY PLAINTIFF
ON OCTOBER 18, 2010
10.18.10 Plaintiffs Consolidated Opposition and Reply
10.18.10 Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant's Motion
10.18.10 Declaration of Brian Patrick
10.18.10 Declaration of Carlisle Moody
10.18.10 Declaration of Edward Peruta
10.18.10 Declaration of Gary Mauser
10.18.10 Declaration of Sean Brady
10.18.10 Application to file Amicus
10.18.10 Proposed Amicus
DOCUMENTS FILED BY DEFENDANTS
ON NOVEMBER 1, 2010
11.01.10 Declaration of Service
11.01.10 Index and Table of Authorities
11.01.10 Motion to extend page limit
11.01.10 Objection to Evidence
11.01.10 Reply and Points and Authorities
Group sues county and sheriff over concealed-weapon permits
By Kristina Davis and Greg Moran
Originally published November 27, 2010 at 8:30 p.m., updated November 27, 2010 at 9:59 p.m.
Edward Peruta, an independent journalist, is one of the people who has sued the county and sheriff after being denied a concealed-weapon permit. He is pictured here with his wife, Lois. Peruta says he needs the permit because of threats he receives from his work.
San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore
Litigants suing county, sheriff
Edward Peruta, 61, an independent journalist who lives with his wife, Lois, in a motor home, parking it in San Diego for several months out of the year. Peruta said he should be armed for self-protection because he often ventures into areas of high crime for stories and travels across the country with valuables. He was denied a permit in February 2009.
Michelle Laxon, 26, owns a hair salon and often travels alone late at night with large sums of cash. She was denied a permit in January due to lack of good cause.
James Dodd, 67, a retired Navy officer who wants a gun for self-protection. He took a CCW permit class in anticipation of getting a CCW but was told upon applying that he likely didn’t meet the good cause requirement and would be wasting his money on an application.
Leslie Buncher, 71, a retired physician who said he still receives threats from protesters due to the abortions he used to perform. He had a CCW permit in the 1970s because of this, but a new application was denied in 2008 because of his retirement.
Mark Cleary, 58, a registered nurse who works with psychiatric patients and has received death threats. He was issued a permit in 2005 upon joining the Honorary Deputy Sheriff’s Association after being previously denied, but could not renew it this year. He was no longer an association member.
The California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, a gun-rights organization that joined the suit to represent the interests of other gun owners.
Source: Peruta v. County of San Diego
How to obtain a CCW permit
Step 1: A licensing employee will conduct a pre-interview to determine if there is enough standing to go forward with a formal application.
Step 2: Turn in an application at the Sheriff’s Department headquarters in person and submit to a second interview.
• Applicants must provide two current utility bills (or similar documents) proving residency; three character reference letters written by local residents, excluding family members; valid California identification; and proof that they’ve completed the firearms course.
• A nonrefundable application fee of $107.63 for a standard two-year license will be collected.
• Applicant will be fingerprinted and photographed.
Step 3: Applicant will qualify with a firearm at the sheriff’s shooting range.
Step 4: A background investigation will be conducted. It includes a home visit, calls to references, a review of documents and checks of criminal records. This usually takes about 90 days.
Step 5: If approved, an additional $50.51 will be collected. If denied, an appeals process is possible at the assistant sheriff level.
You obtained a CCW permit. Now what?
• A CCW permit from San Diego County is good throughout California (unless a specific restriction is issued). Many other states, including Texas and Utah, honor California CCWs.
• Licensees can carry loaded, concealed weapons in a vehicle, purse or on their body.
• A standard CCW permit must be renewed every two years.
• If a licensee commits a crime or misuses the CCW permit, it can be revoked.
Open carry laws
• In counties with populations of less than 200,000, police chiefs or sheriffs may issue permits to carry loaded firearms as long as they aren’t concealed.
• In larger counties, firearms carried in visible holsters must be unloaded. No permit is required.
Sources: San Diego County Sheriff’s Department; California Department of Justice
SAN DIEGO — A new chapter in the decades-old debate over concealed-weapon permits in California is being written in San Diego with a lawsuit accusing the county and newly elected Sheriff Bill Gore of setting standards for such licenses so high that they are “illegal and unconstitutional.”
The suit, filed last year by independent journalist Edward Peruta and six others in federal court in San Diego, joins others filed nationally since 2008 in the wake of two U.S. Supreme Court decisions on gun-ownership rights.
In those cases, the court said the Second Amendment to the Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm in the home for self-defense. The complaint in San Diego argues that the right to self-defense should be enough of a reason to meet the “good cause” standard — one requirement under California law to obtain a concealed-weapon permit.
The suit is an effort to extend the scope of the two Supreme Court rulings to allow individuals to possess weapons outside the home.
State law gives local police chiefs and sheriffs the discretion to issue CCWs, short for “carry concealed weapon” permits, under the following conditions: The applicant must be a law-abiding citizen, have good moral character, be a county resident and establish good cause.
What constitutes “good cause” is at the heart of the debate and the one element that is considered on a case-by-case basis.
“Essentially, an applicant must demonstrate facts that show him to be a specific target or subject of a threat,” said Sanford Toyen, the sheriff’s legal adviser. “Simply stating that one needs a CCW for personal protection or safety will not be sufficient.”
In a hearing before U.S. District Judge Irma Gonzalez on Nov. 15, the lawyer for the plaintiffs said those kinds of rules are now unconstitutional. The Supreme Court rulings establish self-defense as a fundamental right that can’t be squelched so easily, said attorney Carl Michel.
“They can’t say you have to have a death threat or are being stalked, or you must articulate a specific risk in order to exercise your right to self-defense,” he said. “The right to self-defense does not end at the threshold of your home.”
James Chapin, the county’s lawyer, argued that the Supreme Court’s rulings were more narrow than Michel and the gun owners contend. The court said the right was limited to keeping and bearing arms in the home and did not intend it to apply to carrying weapons in public.
The county wants the case dismissed, while Peruta and the others are seeking an injunction halting the practice of issuing permits only to people who can demonstrate a specific good cause.
Gonzalez is expected to issue a ruling sometime in December.
The issue extends beyond the courtroom doors. Gore’s opponents in this year’s sheriff’s race jumped on the claim that the Sheriff’s Department was stingy in granting CCWs, making the debate a cornerstone of the election.
Since 2006, the department has granted 382 new CCW licenses and denied 21. This does not include permits given to retired law enforcement officers, which is allowed under another section of the law.
The most common reasons for denial are not demonstrating good cause, lack of supporting documentation and questionable moral character issues such as arrests, negative contact with law enforcement or providing misleading information, Toyen said.
County officials said about 95 percent of permits are granted, but opponents said that is misleading because applicants are first “pre-interviewed” by the licensing department and essentially told if they will meet the good-cause requirements. So only those likely to get the permit apply.
Gore declined to comment on the litigation but said the department’s current policy hasn’t changed in 15 years — since Sheriff Bill Kolender was elected.
“He tightened up the policy,” Gore said. “There were accusations back then that CCWs were being given out to friends and cronies of the sheriff, so Kolender took the sheriff and undersheriff out of the process. It is all handled by our professional staff in the licensing bureau now. It’s been consistent for the past 15 years. We comply with state law.”
Gore, former head of the FBI in San Diego, became undersheriff in 2004. The county Board of Supervisors appointed him sheriff in 2009, when Kolender retired. Gore received 57 percent of the vote in a three-way race and was elected the county’s top lawman in June.
The lawsuit against the sheriff repeats allegations of favoritism.
Attorney Paul Neuharth, who represents Peruta, said he viewed CCW applications provided to him by the Sheriff’s Department, and many that were approved mentioned being a personal friend of the sheriff or a sheriff’s employee, or included an Honorary Deputy Sheriff’s Association card.
“Everyone should be treated equally,” Neuharth said. “There should be an objective standard to everyone that would apply.”
According to the complaint, Peruta was denied a permit in February 2009 because he couldn’t point to a specific threat and wasn’t considered a county resident.
Peruta, 61, lives in a motor home with his wife and travels across the country, parking in San Diego for several months of the year. As founder of American News and Information Services, a news wire service, Peruta argued that he should be allowed to carry a gun for self-protection because he often ventures into areas of high crime for stories and travels across the country with valuables.
A CCW permit granted in San Diego County is recognized throughout California, as well as in a number of other states, such as Texas and Arizona. Peruta said he holds resident concealed-weapon permits in Florida and Connecticut, where he also lives part of the year, as well as a CCW for nonresidents in Utah.
Attorneys for San Diego County said his application was denied for lacking good cause and had nothing to do with his residency status.
kristina.davis@uniontrib.com; (619) 542-4591; Twitter @kristinadavis
greg.moran@uniontrib.com; (619) 293-1236; Twitter @gregmoran
1. Residency
(a)(1)(A) The sheriff of a county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying satisfies any one of the conditions specified in subparagraph (D) and has completed a course of training as described in subparagraph (E), may issue to that person a license to carry a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person in either one of the following formats: (i) A license to carry concealed a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. (ii) Where the population of the county is less than 200,000 persons according to the most recent federal decennial census, a license to carry loaded and exposed in that county a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. (B) The chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city or city and county, upon proof that the person applying is of good moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, and that the person applying is a resident of that city, and has completed a course of training.
2. Good Cause
a. Several current and retired Chief’s of Police, together with other current and retired sworn
members of law enforcement suggested strongly that I obtain and carry a firearm for protection
while living and residing in a Recreational vehicle.
b. I believe that I have good cause to justify a CCW and will stand the reasons stated.
c. I believe that possessing a CCW and carrying concealed justifies Good Cause and is in the best
interest of California citizens and member of law enforcement due to the application and training
requirements that are not mandatory for Unloaded Open Carry.
d. Black’s Law Dictionary lists sufficient cause under “good cause.” Good cause is defined as
“[a] legally sufficient reason. Good cause is often the burden placed on a litigant (usually by court
rule or order) to show why a request should be granted or an action excused.” Black’s Law
Dictionary 8th Ed.
3. Moral Character
a. There are public officials and private citizens with unimpeachable credentials that were and
are currently prepared to offer opinions on the moral character of Edward Peruta.
b. References were supplied to the San Diego Sheriff’s Department as part of the CCW application.
c. NONE of the references provided as part of the CCW application were contacted to inquire about
or determine my moral character as part of the application process.
d. My background and suitability to purchase, possess and carry firearms openly and/or concealed
has been investigated, reviewed and approved by at least three State issuing law enforcement
agencies in Connecticut, Florida and Utah.
e. Good moral character is also defined as: "A pattern of behavior that is consistent with
the community's current ethical standards and that shows an absence of deceit or
morally reprehensible conduct." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 701 (7th ed. 1999).