Posted July 27, 2015 8:42 pm by Comments

By Ammoland

Wrist Flick Knife Test
The DA’s “wrist flick” test inherently subjective and thereby is unconstitutionally vague in at least this particular instance.

Gilbert, AZ –-( Knife Rights last week filed a Rule 28(j) Notice of Supplemental Authorities in Knife Rights’ Federal Civil Rights lawsuit against New York City and District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr.

A Rule 28(j) filing is used to “bring pertinent and significant authorities” to the Court’s attention after oral argument (in our case, back in January of this year), but before the decision is announced. In this instance the U.S. Supreme Court recently issued an 8-1 decision in the case of Johnson v United States which bolstered Knife Rights’ argument that the New York State law regarding gravity knives is unconstitutionally vague as applied by NYC and the DA to common folding knives (which are distinct from gravity knives because of their bias towards closure).

Justice Scalia wrote the opinion, which determined the residual clause in question to be in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Scalia described the statute as a “failed enterprise” that invited “arbitrary enforcement.”

He declared that individuals are unconstitutionally deprived of due process when they are convicted under “a criminal law so vague that …read more

Source:: AmmoLand

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *