2016 IL App (4th) 150480
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Terry Willis sought judicial review after the Illinois State Police revoked his FOID card (based on a 1978 battery conviction) and the circuit court ordered the Department to issue a FOID card in July 2014.
- The State Police intervened, argued federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)) prohibited Willis from possessing firearms, and indicated it would code Willis’s FOID to reflect a federal prohibitor while still issuing a restricted card.
- Willis sought to hold the Director of State Police in contempt, alleging the Director failed to comply with the court’s order by issuing a FOID that the State Police then treated as invalid for transfers.
- The State Police testified it must follow FBI/NICS guidance, including coding federal prohibitors into its systems; federal authorities audit compliance and can sanction noncompliance.
- The circuit court found the Director in contempt, fined him daily until he issued an unrestricted FOID without federal prohibitors, and awarded Willis attorney fees ($5,996.50).
- The Illinois Appellate Court reversed, concluding the court order only required issuance of a FOID card and did not direct removal of federal prohibitors; post-2013 FOID Act amendments prohibit courts from removing federal prohibitors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Director was in civil contempt for not issuing an unrestricted FOID | Willis: court ordered issuance of a FOID without prohibitors; Director willfully disobeyed | State Police: court order only required issuance; federal prohibitor coding was required by federal law/NICS guidance | Reversed — no contempt: order did not mandate removal of federal prohibitor |
| Whether State Police could lawfully retain or code a federal prohibitor on FOID | Willis: FOID should be fully restored per court order, allowing lawful possession/transfers | State Police: federal law and NICS requirements compelled coding federal prohibitor and restricting transactions | Held for State Police — federal prohibitor coding was required and courts cannot remove federal prohibitor under 2013 FOID amendments |
| Whether Coram compelled different result | Willis relied on Coram for broader court power to remove prohibitors | State Police: Coram addressed pre-2013 FOID Act regime and its dicta is not controlling post-2013 amendments | Coram not controlling; post-2013 amendments and subsequent appellate decisions bar court removal of federal prohibitors |
| Whether attorney fees and fines were properly awarded against Director | Willis: fees/fines appropriate for contempt | State Police: contempt was unfounded because Director followed federal law; fees and fines therefore improper | Reversed — contempt and fee award against Director reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Coram v. State of Illinois, 2013 IL 113867 (Illinois Supreme Court decision relied on below but addressed pre-2013 FOID Act)
- Connour v. Grau, 2015 IL App (4th) 130746 (restoration of FOID under section 10 does not automatically remove federal disability)
- Walton v. Illinois State Police, 2015 IL App (4th) 141055 (2013 FOID Act amendments prohibit circuit courts from granting relief when federal disability exists)
- Frederick, 2015 IL App (2d) 140540 (applies post-2013 FOID Act; court cannot remove federal prohibitor)
- O’Neill v. Director of the Illinois Dept. of State Police, 2015 IL App (3d) 140011 (same conclusion under 2013 amendments)
- Odle v. Department of State Police, 2015 IL App (5th) 140274 (same conclusion under 2013 amendments)