People of Michigan v. Rolando Reynolds Redman
345548
Mich. Ct. App.Feb 11, 2020Background
- On Aug 11, 2017 Redman bought a pistol, a gun case, and ammunition; later a beer in the same bag spilled and soaked the items.
- Redman, on a bicycle, went to a Subway to dry the wet firearm; employees gave him paper towels while he sat in the restaurant.
- A customer saw the firearm, called 911; officers arrived, Redman admitted possession and pointed to an opaque white plastic bag.
- Officers found a nylon gun case, an unloaded Taurus 3-89 secured with a cable lock, and ammunition; Redman later tested .256 on a preliminary breath test.
- Redman was charged and convicted by a jury of carrying a concealed weapon (MCL 750.227) and possessing a firearm while intoxicated (MCL 750.237); he appealed only the carrying-concealed conviction, arguing Second Amendment and equal-protection violations based on lack of vehicle access to statutory transport exceptions.
- The appeals court found the constitutional challenges unpreserved (applied plain-error review) and affirmed the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preservation / Standard of Review | People: constitutional claims not raised below; review under plain-error. | Redman: raised on appeal only (unpreserved). | Unpreserved; plain-error standard applies. |
| Second Amendment (as-applied) | People: statute and concealed-carry restrictions are lawful limits on the right. | Redman: MCL 750.231a exceptions must allow transporting a newly purchased gun home without vehicle access; statute infringes Second Amendment. | Court: Redman did not argue that his conduct falls within the historical scope of the Second Amendment; his conviction arose from carrying a concealed weapon in a restaurant, so the Second Amendment claim was misplaced and need not be reached. |
| Equal Protection (as-applied) | People: classifications rationally related to public safety; alternatives existed to comply with law. | Redman: lack of access to a motor vehicle denies him exceptions in MCL 750.231a, creating unequal treatment. | Court: rational-basis review applies; no evidence offered that he lacked vehicle access; statute rationally related to legitimate safety interests; claim fails. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dist of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognizes individual right to possess firearms for self-defense but permits certain regulatory limits)
- People v. Deroche, 299 Mich. App. 301 (2013) (adopts two-step Second Amendment framework and discusses scope of protected conduct)
- United States v. Greeno, 679 F.3d 510 (6th Cir. 2012) (framework for threshold historical-scope inquiry in Second Amendment cases)
- United States v. Marzzarella, 614 F.3d 85 (3d Cir. 2010) (application of intermediate scrutiny when conduct falls within protected scope)
- People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750 (1999) (plain-error test for unpreserved appellate claims)
- Crego v. Coleman, 463 Mich. 248 (2000) (distinguishes as-applied challenges)
- People v. Green, 322 Mich. App. 676 (2018) (preservation requirement for constitutional challenges)