Fortson

Fortson v. Los Angeles City Attorney's Office

Good Law
852 F.3d 1190·2017 WL 1291305·2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6029
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 7, 2017No. 15-55497California2,052 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schroeder, J.

This appeal challenges the constitutionality of California’s ten-year ban on possession of firearms after a conviction for misdemeanor domestic violence. Plaintiff Benjamin Fortson appeals the dismissal of his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failure to state a claim. He contends that the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office, the California Bureau of Firearms, and individual officers, agents, and attorneys violated his Second Amendment rights by seizing firearms and ammunition he kept in his home, and then prosecuting him for the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. Fortson had previously been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, which under California law, automatically triggers a ten-year prohibition on the ownership or possession of firearms and ammunition. Fortson’s sentencing judge gave him a partial exception so Fortson could keep and possess firearms at his place of work as an armed security guard.

*1192 Fortson challenges the California law both facially and as applied to him. Since we have already upheld the more restrictive federal lifetime ban for persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, we now…

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.