Errol Houston, Jr. v. New Orleans City
675 F.3d 441
5th Cir.2012Background
- Houston was arrested on July 5, 2008; his Glock 22 was seized.
- Approximately one month later, the district attorney entered nolle prosequi on the charges.
- About a year after the arrest, Houston requested return of his firearm but was denied; he alleged a policy of not returning seized firearms.
- Houston was arrested again about a month later; a warrant for illegal possession of a firearm issued and was also nolle prossed; he amended his complaint to include retaliation and unlawful-arrest claims.
- The district court dismissed the Second Amendment and due-process claims under Rule 12(b)(6); later, related claims against New Orleans and a former police superintendent were dismissed under Rule 12(c).
- The Fifth Circuit ultimately AFFIRMED the district court’s judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Second Amendment covers Houston’s claimed right to his specific firearm. | Houston argues the policy burdens a Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. | Defendants contend the policy does not burden a protected Second Amendment interest, or that the right does not extend to a specific firearm. | No Second Amendment violation found. |
| Whether Houston states a due‑process claim based on the retention of his firearm and the available Louisiana remedy. | Houston contends due process was violated and § 15:41 provides an inadequate remedy. | Defendants argue the Louisiana remedy is adequate or that due process requires exhaustion of state procedures. | No due‑process violation stated; § 15:41 remedy insufficiently analyzed by court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Heller v. District of Columbia, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. 2008) (textual/historical limits on Second Amendment scope; fundamental right to keep and bear arms for self-defense)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) (incorporation and historical approach to Second Amendment rights)
- Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011) (textual/historical scope governs what is protected)
- United States v. Chester, 628 F.3d 673 (4th Cir. 2010) (historical analysis of Second Amendment scope)
- Marzzarella v. 614 F.3d 85, 614 F.3d 85 (3d Cir. 2010) (nature of burden and scope of right under history)