Gamble v. United States
30 A.3d 161
| D.C. | 2011Background
- Gamble challenges his conviction for carrying a pistol without a license (CPWL) under Heller; district court denied dismissal and affirmed the right-limits on the Second Amendment outside the home.
- Officers observed Gamble acting suspiciously at night, he fled when approached, and a search revealed a loaded .380 pistol and extra ammunition in his jacket.
- Gamble was indicted on CPWL outside home, possession of an unregistered firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition; after Heller, Gamble sought dismissal.
- Gamble entered a conditional guilty plea to CPWL, reserving appeal on the denial of dismissal; the government dismissed the other two charges.
- The court ultimately held the CPWL statute was constitutionally applied to Gamble and there is no Second Amendment right to carry a concealed weapon in public; severability and remand points were addressed.
- The judgment of conviction was affirmed; the opinion discusses the CPWL statute’s open/ concealed carrying framework and historical regulation of concealed weapons.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Second Amendment protect carrying a concealed weapon outside the home? | Gamble asserts an individual right to carry firearms outside the home. | Court not required to expand the Second Amendment to concealment outside the home. | No Second Amendment right to concealed carry outside the home. |
| Is the District CPWL statute validly applied to Gamble's conduct? | CPWL is overbroad/unconstitutional as applied to concealed carry. | Statute prohibiting concealed carry is constitutionally permissible and properly applied. | Statute validly applied to Gamble's concealed carrying. |
| Is a remand under Plummer appropriate? | Remand to consider registration viability if Second Amendment extended. | No remand because Second Amendment does not protect concealed-carry in public. | Remand not appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. 2008) (announced individual right to keep and bear arms, with limits)
- Mack v. United States, 6 A.3d 1224 (D.C. 2010) (affirms that Heller does not imply a broad right to carry concealed weapons)
- Plummer v. United States, 983 A.2d 323 (D.C. 2009) (remand considerations for registerability under Plummer)
- Smith v. United States, 20 A.3d 759 (D.C. 2011) (Heller not to be read as invalidating all District gun laws)
- Pritchett, 152 U.S.App.D.C. 307, 470 F.2d 455 (D.C. Cir. 1972) (historical/prohibition on concealed weapons)