View Single Post
Old January 17, 2020, 10:57 AM   #24
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,867
Originally Posted by USNRet
I see in other states, the RF is filed, the LEO seizes the guns THEN it goes to a judge.
That is not the process. A petitioner lacks authority to direct a LEO to act.

1. A petition is filed.
2. It is heard by a judge.
3. The judge denies or grants the petition and issues an order.
4. If the order grants the petition, it is served on the respondent.

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
Of course, it was only one article, and there an extremely remote possibility (cough, cough) that the reporter might not have gotten the facts straight.

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
As do all the other articles I've found, this one reports that the judge declined to issue the order -- which means this was the initial hearing, because if this were the follow-up hearing the order would already have been issued and the hearing would have not been over issuing it, but over whether or not to leave it in place for a year.
I see your reasoning. Both the initial ex parte hearing and the subsequent hearing with notice and an opportunity for the respondent to rebut allegations and present evidence should generate their own separate orders, even if the order from the second hearing is merely to retain the restrictions set forth in the order from the initial hearing.

Otherwise, the two week hearing would show as having been held, but with no result on the docket.

I'm not telling you that's how it worked here, but how these things should work according to ordinary court docketing procedures.
zukiphile is offline  
Page generated in 0.03021 seconds with 8 queries