Gonzalez v. City of West Milwaukee (7th Cir. Feb. 2, 2012)
Has anyone read Gonzalez v. City of West Milwaukee (7th Cir. Feb. 2, 2012) http://tinyurl.com/6vdo6k8 ?
Other than him not getting damages under qualified-immunity, does this case have any impact on carry -- OC or CC?
The Seventh Circuit seems to have not address the underlying issues -- but just addressed his suit for damages.
It seems to me that:
After we heard
argument and took this case under advisement,
Wisconsin clarified its law on whether openly carrying
a firearm can constitute disorderly conduct. Effective
November 2011, the state legislature amended Wisconsin’s
longstanding ban on carrying concealed
firearms and adopted a licensing regime in its place.
See Wis. Act 35, 2011-2012 Wis. Legis. Serv. 825 (West).
In that same legislation, lawmakers added the following
language to the disorderly conduct statute:
Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate
a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the
person apply, a person is not in violation of, and
may not be charged with a violation of, this section
for loading, carrying, or going armed with a firearm,
without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or
is concealed or openly carried.
WIS. STAT. § 947.01(2); see Wis. Act 35, 2011-2012 Wis.
Legis. Serv. 825, 849 (West). The legislature also adopted
a new statute similarly providing that openly carrying
a firearm cannot constitute disorderly conduct under
any local ordinance, subject to the same proviso
regarding criminal or malicious intent. See WIS. STAT.
§ 66.0409(6); Wis. Act 35, 2011-2012 Wis. Legis. Serv. 825,
as the district court apparently did, that openly
carrying a firearm in a retail store is disorderly conduct
as a categorical matter goes too far.
Accordingly, although we
think the district court’s probable-cause finding was too
categorical, its alternative holding—that the officers were
entitled to qualified immunity—was on much firmer
seem to leave carry alone and deal only with qualified-immunity.