ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
This matter is before the Administrative Law Court (ALC or
Court) for a final order and decision following a contested case hearing
pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 23-31-215(D) (Supp. 2007), S.C. Code Ann. §§
1-23-310 et seq. (2007), and S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600(B) (Supp.
2007). Petitioner, A.W. Barnhill (Petitioner), applied for a concealed weapon
permit pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§ 23-31-205 et seq. Respondent
South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) denied the application pursuant
to § 23-31-215(B). After timely notice to the parties, a hearing in this
matter was held on October 28, 2008, at the ALC in Columbia, South Carolina.
FINDINGS
OF FACT
Having
carefully considered all testimony, exhibits, and arguments presented at the
hearing in this matter, and taking into account the credibility and accuracy of
the evidence, I find the following facts by a preponderance of the evidence:
Petitioner,
A.W. Barnhill, is over the age of twenty-one and a resident of Marion County,
South Carolina. He runs a small business which frequently stays open late.
After closing he then must take money to the bank. Therefore, he is seeking to
carry a gun with him for protection at his business and home.
As part of the application process, Petitioner is required to
answer the following question: “Have you ever plead guilty, been found
guilty, paid a fine, forfeited bond, been jailed or placed on probation for any
offense?” In response to this question, Petitioner checked the box for “yes.” However,
upon receiving his application, SLED performed a background check on Petitioner
which indicated that Petitioner pled guilty to assault and battery of a high
and aggravated nature in 1980. Petitioner was sentenced to ten years,
suspended to three years probation for that conviction. Petitioner completed
his probation and has not been in any trouble since. As a result the above, Petitioner’s
application for a concealed weapon permit was denied by SLED.
CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW
Based
upon the above Findings of Fact, I conclude the following as a matter of law:
1. S.C.
Code Ann. § 23-31-215(D) (Supp. 2007) and S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600(B) (2007)
grant jurisdiction to this Court to hear this contested case.
2. SLED
is required to conduct a background check of an applicant for a concealed weapon
permit upon submission of required information and proof of training. S.C.
Code Ann.
§ 23-31-215(B)
(Supp. 2006). If an applicant’s fingerprint and background checks are
favorable, SLED must issue a permit to the applicant. Id. However, if
SLED determines that an applicant’s background is unfavorable, SLED may deny
the permit and shall issue a written statement to the applicant specifying its
reasons for denying the permit. Id.
3. Federal law
prohibits possession of a firearm by a person who has been convicted of a crime
punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year:
It shall be
unlawful for any person—
(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime
punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
to ship or transport in interstate
or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or
ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or
transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
18 U.S.C. §
922(g)(1). In this case, Petitioner’s criminal background record
reflects that he was convicted of assault and battery of a high and aggravated
nature for which he received a ten year sentenced suspended to three years probation.
Based upon his record and applicable federal law, it is highly probable that
Petitioner’s possession of a firearm would place him in direct violation of
federal law. The Court recognizes the importance of Petitioner obtaining the
concealed weapon permit for his protection, especially in light of the facts of
this case. However, the Court cannot ignore the legal implications of Petitioner’s
criminal record upon his right to possess a firearm. Though Petitioner appears
to be a very responsible individual, the ramification of
approving his concealed weapon permit would be to authorize a person prohibited
from possessing a firearm to carry a firearm. Accordingly, Petitioner’s
application for a concealed weapon permit is denied.
ORDER
IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s application for a concealed weapon permit
is DENIED.
AND
IT IS SO ORDERED.
___________________________
Ralph King
Anderson, III
Administrative
Law Judge
November 7, 2008
Columbia, South Carolina
|
