Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
dk...the guy admitted to battery on his wife in a state that did not have a specific misdemeanor domestic violence statute.
IMO (and the Court's) he used a technicality to get around the prohibition of owning a gun.
|
look at the dates of such laws and convictions, dc. he pleaded to a general battery charge in 94. had to because there was no DV statute in the state at that time.
Lautenberg becomes law in 96, so state makes a DV statute to work with the amendment. No problem here. This makes it so that anyone who commits domestic violence can be charged with domestic violence.
2004, police are called to his house because of domestic violence, find guns, charge him with illegal possession due to lautenberg, which didn't exist in 94, and no conviction of DV because it wasn't a specific crime in that state in 94. Ten years later, with just two short sentences, his crime of general battery is now domestic battery.
this is ex post facto if ever there was an example of it.