2024 Ohio 1954
Ohio Ct. App.2024Background
- Carl Storms was charged in Ohio with carrying a concealed weapon (CCW) while on community control after a prior felony conviction.
- At the time of his arrest, Storms was considered a "fugitive from justice" due to missing probation appointments and having an outstanding warrant.
- Storms filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, arguing the CCW statute violated his Second Amendment rights under New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen.
- The trial court denied the motion, holding only that Storms was not a "qualifying adult" under Ohio law due to his felony status and fugitive status, without conducting a Bruen analysis.
- On appeal, the state conceded that Bruen set the applicable standard, and the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for the trial court to apply the correct test.
Issues
| Issue | Storms's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of Second Amendment / Bruen | Bruen applies; Second Amendment covers his conduct; statute must be justified by historical tradition | Bruen applies only to "law-abiding citizens"; Storms excluded due to felony/fugitive status | Court: Bruen applies to Storms’s challenge; state bears burden under Bruen |
| State's burden under Bruen | State must prove CCW statute is supported by historical tradition for regulation | No burden to show historical support since Storms is not law-abiding | Court: State has burden to make historical showing under Bruen |
| Constitutionality of Ohio’s CCW statute as applied | Application to Storms violates Second Amendment; no relevant historical tradition | Statute valid because Storms disqualified under state law | Court: Trial court erred by not addressing constitutionality under Bruen; reversed and remanded |
| Exclusion from "qualifying adult" status | Status shouldn’t override Second Amendment protections | Properly excluded due to Ohio statutory requirements | Court: Statutory exclusion not enough; must apply Bruen |
Key Cases Cited
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (sets standard for Second Amendment challenges, requiring historical tradition analysis)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (recognizes individual right to keep and bear arms under Second Amendment)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (incorporates Second Amendment right against the states)