O'Neill v. Director of the Illinois Department of State Police
28 N.E.3d 1020
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- In 1999 O’Neill pled guilty to battery and reckless conduct for punching his son; he received probation and fines.
- In May and July 2013 the Illinois Department of State Police revoked O’Neill’s FOID card, citing 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(9) and the FOID Act and informing him the Director would not grant relief and that he must petition the circuit court.
- O’Neill filed a petition in Marshall County circuit court under 430 ILCS 65/10(b) seeking reinstatement; he served the State’s Attorney but not the Department.
- The circuit court ordered reinstatement, finding O’Neill had not committed a forcible felony within 20 years, was not likely to be dangerous, and relief would not be contrary to public interest.
- The Department intervened, moved to vacate, and appealed arguing (1) the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction and (2) federal law (§922(g)(9)) permanently prohibits O’Neill from possessing firearms, so state relief is barred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction to hear O’Neill’s FOID petition | O’Neill argued the Department waived/exhaustion was excused because Department told him to petition the circuit court and refused administrative relief | Department argued §10(a) vests exclusive initial jurisdiction in the Director for non-enumerated offenses and O’Neill failed to exhaust administrative remedies | Court held circuit court had jurisdiction: Department’s letter was a final administrative decision and directed O’Neill to the circuit court, so appealing to the Director would be futile |
| Whether federal law (§922(g)(9)) bars state courts from granting FOID relief | O’Neill conceded his conviction met the federal "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" definition and relied on Coram’s plurality suggesting relief might be available | Department argued federal law permanently prohibits O’Neill from firearm possession and the FOID Act’s §10(c)(4) bars relief contrary to federal law | Court held federal law bars reinstatement; reversed circuit court because under current law the state court cannot remove the federal firearms disability |
| Whether the circuit court’s factual findings (danger to public safety, public interest, 20-year forcible felony rule) justified reinstatement despite federal prohibition | O’Neill relied on the trial court’s favorable factual findings and cited Coram for authority that state relief procedures could remove federal disability | Department argued even if facts favor O’Neill, §10(c)(4) and federal law preclude state-ordered relief and federal relief procedures (18 U.S.C. §925(c)) are the proper avenue | Held: Court did not dispute the trial court’s factual findings but concluded statutory and federal law prevent state courts from granting relief removing a federal disability; reversal required |
| Whether O’Neill’s concession that his conviction is a federal misdemeanor crime of domestic violence controls the outcome | O’Neill conceded the point but argued state relief remained available | Department asserted the concession established the federal disability and thus federal prohibition applies | Held: O’Neill’s concession and Hayes precedent confirm the federal disability applies; state court cannot override it |
Key Cases Cited
- Belleville Toyota, Inc. v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., 199 Ill. 2d 325 (2002) (subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived)
- United States v. Hayes, 555 U.S. 415 (2009) (§922(g)(9) applies when predicate offense involves use of force even if domestic relationship is not an element)
- Coram v. State of Illinois, 2013 IL 113867 (2013) (plurality and separate writings analyzing whether state courts may remove federal firearms disabilities under amended FOID Act)
- People v. Belk, 203 Ill. 2d 187 (2003) (questions of law reviewed de novo)
- Schrader v. Holder, 704 F.3d 980 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (addressing constitutional concerns about perpetual firearm prohibitions)