In re the Application for a New Jersey Permit to Carry a Handgun by Pantano, 429 N.J. Super. 478

Pantano appeals a trial court denial of a permit to carry a handgun under N.J.S.A. 2C:58-4 after the Manalapan Chief approved his application in December 2010.
Judge DeStefano held Pantano failed to show a justifiable need for self-protection; the court emphasized the statutory test and regulatory definition of justifiable need.
Pantano is a landscape-supply business owner handling large cash transactions and after-hours deliveries, creating perceived robbery risk.
Pantano testified to cash receipts, after-hours deliveries, and the difficulty of guarding cash; he sought a permit to protect himself from robbery.
The record included an alleged trespass four years earlier and a family robbery of Pantano’s father, but the trial court found no specific threats against Pantano personally.
The appellate court conducted de novo review of legal standards for justifiable need and affirmed the denial, affirming the statutory framework and rejecting deference to the chief without corroborated reasons.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Pantano proved justifiable need for a permit to carry	Pantano argues he faced urgent risk due to cash-heavy deliveries and past incidents.	The court correctly found no specific threats or unique danger to Pantano requiring a handgun.	Affirmed; no justifiable need shown.
Whether the trial court should defer to the police chief’s approval	Pantano contends deference to the chief’s decision is required.	Deference is not warranted given the lack of disclosed reasons and potential conflict concerns.	Affirmed; trial court’s de novo review appropriate.
Whether the justifiable need requirement infringes the Second Amendment	Pantano argues the statute constrains Second Amendment rights outside the home.	The statute does not infringe as Heller does not necessarily apply to carrying outside the home.	Affirmed; no constitutional violation found.

In re Preis, 118 N.J. 564 (N.J. 1990) (test for justifiable need requires an urgent need with specific threats or past attacks)
Siccardi v. State, 59 N.J. 545 (N.J. 1971) (special danger to life required for self-protection beyond general fears)
In re Application of “X”, 59 N.J. 533 (N.J. 1971) (holding on substantial funds and threats in high-crime contexts)
In re Borinsky, 363 N.J. Super. 10 (App. Div. 2003) (alternative protective measures considered in justification of carrying)
Doe v. Dover Twp., 216 N.J. Super. 539 (App. Div. 1987) (adjusted threat level considerations in justifiable need cases)
In re Boyadjian, 362 N.J. Super. 463 (App. Div. 2003) (deference to police chief's decision not automatic when reasons undisclosed)
Weston v. State, 60 N.J. 36 (1972) (principle that deference to agency could be limited by conflicts of interest)
Heller v. District of Columbia, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. 2008) (recognized individual right to keep and bear arms but not an unlimited outside-home carry right)
Crespo v. Crespo, 408 N.J. Super. 25 (App. Div. 2009) (discussion of Heller’s scope and state restrictions post-Heller)
Piszczatoski v. Filko, 840 F. Supp. 2d 813 (D.N.J. 2012) (federal court held NJ permit regime not burdening Second Amendment right outside home)