People v. Frederick
40 N.E.3d 63
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- In 1991 Frederick pled guilty to battery (after domestic battery was reduced) involving a former cohabiting girlfriend; he received conditional discharge.
- Frederick obtained a FOID card in 2011; section 8(n) of the FOID Act allowed denial/revocation where federal law prohibited firearm possession (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) bars those convicted of a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence").
- The FOID Act (pre-2013) permitted the Director or a circuit court to grant relief and issue a FOID card in certain cases even if federal law would otherwise prohibit possession.
- The General Assembly amended section 10 of the FOID Act effective Jan. 1, 2013, adding that courts may not issue orders if the petitioner is prohibited under federal law and that granting relief must not be contrary to federal law.
- In March 2013 the Department revoked Frederick’s FOID card citing his 1991 conviction and § 922(g)(9); Frederick filed a petition in the Stephenson County circuit court seeking issuance of a FOID card.
- The circuit court ordered the Department to issue a FOID card (applying the 2011 law); the Department appealed, arguing (1) lack of jurisdiction because Frederick should have appealed administratively, and (2) under the 2013 amendments and federal law Frederick cannot receive a FOID card.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the circuit court have jurisdiction to hear Frederick’s petition or must he first appeal administratively to the Director? | Frederick: revocation was "based upon" domestic battery so section 10(a) permits direct petition to circuit court. | Dept.: Frederick’s conviction was for battery (not enumerated domestic battery), so section 10(a) required administrative appeal to Director. | Court: "based upon" language reached here; revocation was based upon domestic battery so circuit court had jurisdiction. |
| Which version of the FOID Act applies to the court’s review — 2011 (issuance) or 2013 (revocation)? | Frederick: applied 2011 version (favored his relief). | Dept.: 2013 amendments control because revocation occurred in 2013. | Court: apply the statute in effect at time of administrative action (2013); circuit court erred by applying 2011 law. |
| Does Frederick’s 1991 battery conviction trigger the federal prohibition in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)? | Frederick: argues Illinois courts have in past overridden federal prohibition (pre-2013) and/or his offense was not domestic under federal definition. | Dept.: Under Hayes, a generic battery conviction can qualify as a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" if committed in a domestic relationship; Frederick’s conviction thus triggers § 922(g)(9). | Court: Under Hayes, the conviction qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence when the domestic relationship is shown; Frederick conceded this and thus is federally disqualified. |
| Can the circuit court (or Director) grant relief and issue a FOID card despite federal prohibition given the 2013 FOID Act amendments? | Frederick: Illinois precedent allowed courts to override federal disqualification (cases pre-2013). | Dept.: 2013 amendments bar courts/Director from issuing FOID cards where federal law prohibits possession. | Court: 2013 amendments prevent courts/Director from granting relief that would contravene federal law; therefore issuance was precluded and circuit court’s order reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Coram v. State of Illinois, 2013 IL 113867 (Illinois Supreme Court) (addressed FOID Act relief pre-amendment and discussed effect of 2013 amendments)
- United States v. Hayes, 555 U.S. 415 (U.S. Supreme Court) (state generic assault/battery convictions qualify as misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence for § 922(g)(9) if domestic relationship is shown)
- Hayashi v. Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation, 2014 IL 116023 (Illinois Supreme Court) (applying new statutory eligibility requirements prospectively; no impermissible retroactivity)