David Mehl v. Lou Blanas

Good Law
532 F. App'x 752
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 8, 201308-15773California863 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

California generally prohibits the carrying of concealed firearms, see Cal.Penal Code § 25400, but provides for county sheriffs to license individuals to carry concealed firearms pursuant to certain requirements, see id. §§ 26150 et seq. During the tenure of former Sheriff Lou Blanas, plaintiffs unsuccessfully applied to the Sacramento County Sheriffs Department for concealed-carry licenses. They contend that Sacramento County’s imple mentation of the California concealed-carry licensing scheme, as applied to them, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

1. Plaintiff Mehl lacks standing to challenge Sacramento County’s concealed-carry policies, because he failed fully to complete the county’s application process as directed, even after he was informed of the deficiencies. “[A] plaintiff lacks standing to challenge a rule or policy to which he has not submitted himself by actually applying for the desired benefit.” Madsen v. Boise State Univ., 976 F.2d 1219, 1220 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). We, therefore, affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants as to all of Mehl’s claims.

2. Unlike Mehl, plaintiff Lau…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.