« Law - Terry Gross interviews the actor who plays lawyer Saul Goodman on Breaking Bad | Main | Ind. Courts - "LaGrange Co Commissioners hear of need for courthouse repair" »

Tuesday, August 06, 2013

Ind. Decisions - More on today's opinion in Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana

Supplementing the ILB summary of the opinion from earlier today, the most recent ILB post on this case was in June 20th. It quoted from the Bloomington Herald Times story by Laura Lane, whose report about the oral argument began:

Should disturbing and deadly shooting sprees in movie theaters and elementary schools play a role in deciding if it’s constitutional to take away a man’s guns because of a concern he might someday use the weapons to harm others?

Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Elaine Brown’s query was the heart of a 40-minute debate before a three-judge panel Tuesday regarding the fate of Robert Redington and the 51 shotguns, rifles and pistols Bloomington police confiscated from him last fall. Appellate Court Judge Cale Bradford seemed uncomfortable with the notion of pre-emptive gun seizure unless a person is deemed mentally ill. “To decide this case on what happened in those situations runs contrary to deciding every case, and law, on its own merits,” he said as lawyers argued both sides. “Those were terrible situations, but we cannot react emotionally.”

But today, the ruling came out the way many who follow the Court might not have predicted. Judge Brown and Judge Bradford voted to uphold the trial court’s order to retain Redington's firearms, while Judge Riley dissented.

Tim Evans of the Indianapolis Star has a story here. Some quotes:

Police may keep 51 firearms seized from a suspected mentally ill man, who claimed to have premonitions about the disappearance of IU coed Lauren Spierer, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today in a split decision.

Robert Redington presents a danger and Bloomington Police had the right under Indiana law to seize and keep the weapons confiscated in 2012, Justices Elaine Brown and Cale Bradford ruled in upholding a Monroe Circuit Judge’s decision.

Justice Patricia Riley disagreed with the majority, writing in a separate opinion that she did not believe Redington was dangerous under the definition in Indiana law.

The three-judge appellate panel heard oral arguments in June.

Guy A. Relford, a Carmel-based lawyer known for championing Second Amendment rights, said he expects Redington will ask the Indiana Supreme Court to review the case.

“I respect the court’s opinion, but I respectfully disagree with the majority,” said Relford, who represented Redington in the appeal.

Relford said he believes Riley, in her dissenting opinion, got it right. He said Redington has never been arrested and there was no evidence of violence in his background.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 6, 2013 01:22 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions