|
I don't know him, but assume skill is there until reason to believe otherwise. I was just referring to other posts in other threads where it's been mentioned that in preliminary hearings/complaints lawyers on both sides cover every ground they can think of so they won't be prevented from covering them again later because they didn't raise them from the beginning. Ex Post Facto has been ruled on before, which is one reason not to. But the right argument could open the door again, which would be a reason to raise it and let them quash it if they can. I think the key would be getting the firearms disability categorized as a punishment.
|