Willis v. The Macon County State's Attorney
2016 IL App (4th) 150480
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- Terry L. Willis sought restoration of his FOID card after its April 2014 revocation based on a 1978 battery conviction. The Macon County circuit court ordered the Illinois Department of State Police to issue Willis a FOID card in July 2014.
- The State Police intervened and argued federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)) and FOID Act provisions barred Willis because of a domestic-relationship misdemeanor; they later issued a FOID card but coded it with a federal prohibitor and sent a letter warning Willis federal prosecution risks remained.
- Willis filed a rule to show cause and later sought to hold the Director of State Police in contempt for allegedly failing to provide an unrestricted FOID card and for invalidating the card in the State database.
- The circuit court found the Director in indirect civil contempt, ordered issuance of a FOID without federal prohibitors to purge the contempt, imposed daily fines, and awarded Willis attorney fees.
- The State Police appealed, arguing (1) the Director did not violate any court order and (2) federal law required the State Police to include federal prohibitors and follow NICS guidance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Director violated a court order by issuing a FOID card coded with a federal prohibitor | Willis: July 2014 order directed issuance of a FOID; coding with a federal prohibitor violates that order | State Police: July order only required issuing a FOID; federal law/NICS required coding federal prohibitor and warning letter | Held: No. The July order did not expressly require removal of federal prohibitor; contempt finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence |
| Whether a court can order removal of a federal prohibitor from a FOID card post-2013 FOID Act amendments | Willis: Circuit court relied on Coram to infer removal authority | State Police: 2013 FOID Act amendments and federal law prohibit courts from removing federal prohibitors | Held: The 2013 FOID Act amendments prevent circuit courts from granting relief that removes federal prohibitors; Coram does not control here |
| Whether the State Police acted willfully in noncompliance to support civil contempt | Willis: Court inferred willfulness from conduct | State Police: Actions were compelled or required by federal guidance, audits, and NICS responsibilities | Held: State Police presented valid legal and regulatory reasons; contempt finding not supported |
| Whether attorney fees and fines were properly awarded incident to the contempt finding | Willis: Fees and fines appropriate due to contempt | State Police: Contempt improper, so fees/fines improper | Held: Because contempt finding reversed, attendant fees/fines reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Coram v. State of Illinois, 996 N.E.2d 1057 (Ill. 2013) (discussed Supreme Court decision addressing FOID relief but largely pre-dating 2013 amendments)
- Connour v. Grau, 35 N.E.3d 244 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015) (restoration of FOID under FOID Act does not automatically remove federal firearm disability)
- Walton v. Illinois State Police, 39 N.E.3d 1095 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015) (post-2013 amendments, circuit courts prohibited from granting relief that removes federal prohibitors)
- Frederick v. Director of Illinois State Police, 40 N.E.3d 63 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015) (applicable FOID Act version is the one in effect when the FOID was revoked)
- Best v. Best, 860 N.E.2d 240 (Ill. 2006) (standard for manifest weight review)
- People v. Kladis, 960 N.E.2d 1104 (Ill. 2011) (abuse of discretion standard explained)