Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Court of Appeals of Georgia has denied a GCO member’s motion for reconsideration of its decision that probate judges, though required to issue GFLs within 60 days of application, may wait indefinitely to issue GFLs.

Moore argues that if the probate judge does not hear from local law enforcement within 50 days, [he or] she can (and must) assume that no derogatory information has been found[,] and issue the license. We disagree. Issuing a license under such circumstances would be a gross dereliction of the probate court's statutory duty and would put the public at risk.
(from http://www.georgiacarry.com/moore/COA%20Opinion.pdf)
BUT ...

In the Senate Immigration Bill currently being debated completion of background checks are not required for probationary legal status of illegal immigrants. Says Alabama's Sen. Jeff Sessions:

Legal status must be granted to illegal aliens 24 hours after they file an application, even if the aliens have not yet "passed all appropriate background checks." Last year's bill at least gave DHS 90 days to check an alien's background before any status was granted.
(from http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11605)
THEREFORE ...

No legal status will be given to any potential GFL holder until all appropriate background checks are complete. But legal status will be given to any illegal alien even if all appropriate background checks are not complete.

:shock:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,460 Posts
Just as confused as I am...

Between these two mandates lies a quandary. In order for the probate court to do its duty, it must rely on information about an applicant provided by state and federal law enforcement agencies over which it has
no control.
So the court has no control over whether or not the fed will process the fingerprints, which is true.

Because the probate court may only issue a license if no disqualifying or derogatory information was discovered as a result of those background checks, the 60-day period is implicitly extended by the statute itself when necessary to accommodate any delays that reasonably may be attributed to the investigative process.
60 days does not mean 60 days if the fingerprints are delayed or never even come back. Regardless of local delays in sending or processing. Which means if NCIC or GCIC quit processing fingerprints for any reason, then by this ruling no licenses can be granted to anyone until the law is changed to edit out the problem or they start taking fingerprints again.

Basically the appeals court said, a time limit of 60 days only matters if they can get it done in 60 days. If it takes longer, that is ok.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,926 Posts
Gunstar1 said:
when necessary to accommodate any delays that reasonably may be attributed to the investigative process.
. . . Regardless of local delays in sending or processing.
Well, how are you going to know without a lawsuit, and who will risk a lawsuit if the rule is that there is no time limit?

GCO is asking the Georgia Supreme Court to take this case up on appeal. It is discretionary as to whether they will do so.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top