Richards v. Harris
Haynie (was Richards) v. Harris
Plaintiff Brendan Richards was arrested May 20, 2010 in Rohnert Park, and subsequently charged with possession of unregistered 'assault weapons'. All charges were dismissed September 29, 2010.
Defendant Kamala Harris is the Attorney General of California. Defendant Department of Justice is the agency Ms Harris supervises. Defendant Dean Becker is the arresting officer from the City of Rohnert Park. Defendant Rohnert Park is a city in northern California.
The suit asks for
- a declaratory judgment and/or injunctive relief that California Penal Code § 12276.1 is unconstitutional.
- a declaratory judgment and/or injunctive relief that California Penal Code § 12031(e) is unconstitutional.
- a declaratory judgment and/or prospective injunctive relief to compel Defendants KAMALA HARRIS and the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE to issue appropriate memorandums and/or bulletins to the State’s District Attorneys and Law Enforcement Agencies to prevent wrongful arrests.
- injunctive relief against CITY OF ROHNERT PARK and OFFICER BECKER to prevent future violations of the Fourth Amendment.
- Damages from CITY OF ROHNERT PARK and OFFICER BECKER
- Court costs
- Third amended complaint filed Dec 20, 2013
- four cases were consolidated under Haynie v. Harris, Case No.: 3:10-CV-01255 SI
- Latest case management set for Sept 6, 2013
- Amended complaint filed November 1, 2102
- Haynie and Richards were consolidated, case is under "Haynie"
Haynie v. Harris, Case No.: 3:10-CV-01255 SI was ordered consolidated with Richards v. Harris (I), Case No.: 3:11-CV-02493 SI, in an ordered filed on October 22, 2011
- Suit filed May 19, 2011 in UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO / OAKLAND DIVISION complaint
Calguns Discussion Thread
(Original reference) Haynie v. Pleasanton
Discussion Thread: Bullet Button: Haynie v. Pleasanton
Plaintiff Haynie was arrested in Alameda County for allegedly violating the AWCA , when Pleasanton Police thought that his Colt AR-15 was a banned weapon. FAC ¶ 12. However, the rifle possessed by Haynie was equipped with a “bullet button,” a device which required the use of a tool to remove the magazine, taking the weapon out of the statutory definition of an assault weapon. FAC ¶15. Therefore, charges were never filed, and Pleasanton stipulated to Plaintiff Haynie’s factual innocence and agreed to pay for Haynie’s bail bond costs. FAC ¶¶18-22.