All about guns, legislation and politics in New York
Tuesday’s Newsbits:
Elections:
Legislation:
NRA:
Politics:
Primary Candidates for NYC Mayor.
Openly #2A hostile Democrats:
Less #2A hostile Democrats:
Openly #2A hostile Republicans:
Less #2A hostile Republicans:
Primary candidates for Manhattan DA.
Openly #2A hostile Democrats:
Less #2A hostile Democrats:
Openly #2A hostile incumbents in party primaries. Vote for their opponent no matter who they are.
Openly #2A hostile state legislators in party primaries for other offices. Vote for their opponent no matter who they are.
Openly #2A hostile primary candidates for various offices. Vote for their opponent no matter who they are.
Finger Lakes Daily News reports:
“The Schuyler County government has called on Governor Cuomo to veto legislation to allow civil nuisance lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers if a legally sold firearm is used to cause harm. Legislature Chairman Carl Blowers says the law would hurt New York’s economy, because it targets both large and small businesses that make and sell guns and accessories, especially those located upstate …”
Nice, but I don’t see that happening.
Tuesday’s Newsbits:
Jurisprudence:
Legislation:
Politics:
The Daily Freeman reports:
“Two Republican state senators in the Mid-Hudson Valley joined Democrats this week in supporting two bills that sponsors say could reduce gun violence. But Sue Serino, R-Hyde Park, and Mike Martucci, R-New Hampton, voted against other gun-related measures that came before legislators, along with the rest of the region’s GOP delegation. The Legislature passed a package of anti-gun violence bills on Tuesday ranging from a ban on possession of “ghost” guns that lack serial numbers to a ban on the purchase of a weapon by anyone facing an outstanding arrest warrant for a felony or serious offense. The measures next go to Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Both Serino and Martucci voted in favor of those two bills but opposed legislation allowing the New York attorney general to sue gun manufacturers in certain scenarios …”
Serino and Martucci with their room temperature IQs are too stupid to realize there’s nothing to be gained by voting for any gun control legislation. This is especially true for the bills in question S-13A and S-14A because Brooklyn Senator Jabari Brisport voted against both bills both times they came up. Clearly he isn’t concerned about any blowback for his votes so why should Serino and Martucci be?
I received some interesting commentary from a person whose opinion I respect regarding A-6198B/S-5000B, Prohibits the sale, purchase, or transfer of firearms to anyone known to have an outstanding warrant for a felony or serious offense:
The arrest warrant bill is a big Fuck You to law enforcement because of how warrants issue in NY. In NY warrants issue under one of two situations. After a grand jury indictment or upon the filing of a criminal instrument. This tracks federal law in terms of indictment [which includes a prelim]. HOWEVER, unlike a number of states or under the federal rules, NY does not have a Ramey Warrant procedure whereby you can get a warrant without actually commencing a criminal action.
Under NY law, a person’s right to counsel indelibly attached to a matter upon any one of three triggering events (1) entry or retaining of counsel on the matter; (2) commencement of a criminal prosecution of the matter; (3) request for counsel or invocation of the right to counsel concerning the matter while held in custody.
When the right to counsel indelibly attaches based on one of the three rules listed above, any statement deliberately elicited from that person by the police without counsel present is subject to suppression and any consent to search obtained without counsel present is invalid. The issuance of an arrest warrant triggers the right to counsel.
The New York Court of Appeals has recognized that the New York right to counsel rule under the New York State Constitution Article 1 Section 6 is much broader than the federal right to counsel rule under the U.S. Constitution’s Sixth Amendment. In New York, the right to counsel is grounded on this State’s constitutional and statutory guarantees of the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to the assistance of counsel,and due process of law. It extends well beyond the right to counsel afforded by the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and other State Constitutions. The right to counsel is so revered in New York that it may be raised for the first time on appeal. People v. Davis, 75 N.Y.2d 517.
There are several fundamental differences between the right to counsel rules under New York State law and federal law.
A key difference between the right to counsel under the New York rule and the federal rule is that under the federal rule, a defendant retains the power to waive the right to counsel without first conferring with his attorney if the defendant has any discussions with the police and if the defendant committed a voluntary and knowing waiver of his right to counsel; in New York one may not waive the right to counsel without first conferring with an attorney even if voluntary and even if the defendant initiates the discussion.
Additionally, in New York, a defendant for whom counsel has interceded may not waive counsel without counsel being present, even if the suspect has no idea that a lawyer has been procured for him, as long as the police do. However, under the federal rule if the defendant does not know about counsel’s intervention he may waive the right to counsel without counsel being present or having conferred with counsel. The general rule in New York is that someone that is held in custody on a criminal matter where an attorney has entered that matter, then the indelible right to counsel has attached and the person being held may not waive the right to counsel with regard to that matter unless he has conferred with an attorney.
Additionally, a person held in custody on a criminal matter, where counsel has entered, he may not validly waive the right to counsel on any other matter, even if it is unrelated to the matter upon which counsel has entered. When a defendant is represented on a charge for which he is being held in custody, he may not be interrogated in the absence of counsel on any matter, whether related or unrelated to the subject of the representation. People v. Rogers 48 N.Y.2d 167.
Recently, the Court of Appeals has found that even if it is reasonable for an interrogator to suspect that an attorney may have entered the custodial matter, there must be an inquiry regarding the defendants representational status and the interrogator will be charged with the knowledge that such an inquiry likely would have revealed. People v. Lopez 16 N.Y.3d 375.
As such, obtaining a warrant to stop a gun acquisition triggers the right to counsel and all that entails. That is why Cuomo initially included the warrant provision and then dropped it as DA’s went nuts absent the creation of a Ramey warrant procedure.
Hudson Valley 1 reports:
“Six candidates are running for two slots on the ballot for the Saugerties Town Board … Kevin Freeman, at a candidates’ forum in May, emphasized “compassion and empathy” and a candidate’s “moral compass” over political issues in deciding on a candidate. He noted that “security, education and our natural resources are all concepts that transcend party affiliation. Freeman said he has been involved in politics since joining the Democratic Committee five years ago. He referred to his experience as an election inspector and a census enumerator. He is at this time the secretary of the Town of Saugerties Zoning Board of Appeals. Freeman has the endorsement of the Saugerties Democratic Committee. He has worked with such organizations as a Citizen Action and New Yorkers Against Gun Violence. “I’ve registered voters and I’ve stood in the rain and snow in marches for women’s rights, Black Lives Matter and organized labor. He has held jobs in information technology and assistant administrator, as well as having been a laborer and worked in retail, he said. Among ideas he said he favors are participatory budgeting, ranked choice voting as ways of encouraging conversions about our future …”
