|
|
|
Lafayette. La. —
Prosecution officials have filed a motion in limine regarding all evidence and arguments by Bobby Hickman and his attorneys relating to the defense of public authority concerning Hickman's alleged possession of illegal firearms.
A motion in limine is used to request that certain evidence may, or may not, be introduced during trial.
The prosecution argued in a motion filed Wednesday that an individual citing the public authority defense needs to have "actual, not apparent," authority to commit illegal activity.
"The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals noted that other circuits had held that the public authority defense only applies when a government official authorizes the defendant to perform an act that would otherwise b a crime, and the official possesses the actual authority to do so," Assistant U.S. Attorney Brett Grayson said in the motion.
"The Chief of Police of the Leesville Police Department lacks actual authority to authorize anyone to possess firearms in violation of federal laws, including himself," the motion states.
Grayson also said that the same court said that local law enforcement officials and agencies do not have the authority to exempt individuals from federal firearms laws.
The motion also said that government entities should register weapons in violation of federal laws unless they are being held for evidence in criminal cases.
"There is no indication that these firearms were being held for that purpose," the motion states. "The Leesville Police Department has an evidence vault for that purpose."
Grayson, through the motion, also argues that Hickman's public authority defense was incomplete because it failed to specify the time period in which Hickman had the authority to possess the illegal weapons.
"It also fails to specify who in the federal government, with actual authority to do so, authorized him to possess such unlawful firearms while he was the Chief of the Leesville Police Department and after he was discharged from that position on Jan. 28, 2011," the motion continues.
Hickman is charged with two counts of possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number and one count of unlawful possession of an unregistered firearm. Earlier this week, Hickman, through his attorney, James Doyle, filed a motion to suppress all evidence found through search warrants conducted by the Leesville Police Department as well as a motion to dismiss all charges because of Hickman's public authority defense and that he did not possess the weapons in any position other than his duties as Leesville Chief of Police.
A trial date, in front of U.S. District Judge Richard T. Haik, is scheduled for Oct. 3 in Lafayette.
Prosecution officials have filed a motion in limine regarding all evidence and arguments by Bobby Hickman and his attorneys relating to the defense of public authority concerning Hickman's alleged possession of illegal firearms.
A motion in limine is used to request that certain evidence may, or may not, be introduced during trial.
The prosecution argued in a motion filed Wednesday that an individual citing the public authority defense needs to have "actual, not apparent," authority to commit illegal activity.
"The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals noted that other circuits had held that the public authority defense only applies when a government official authorizes the defendant to perform an act that would otherwise b a crime, and the official possesses the actual authority to do so," Assistant U.S. Attorney Brett Grayson said in the motion.
"The Chief of Police of the Leesville Police Department lacks actual authority to authorize anyone to possess firearms in violation of federal laws, including himself," the motion states.
Grayson also said that the same court said that local law enforcement officials and agencies do not have the authority to exempt individuals from federal firearms laws.
The motion also said that government entities should register weapons in violation of federal laws unless they are being held for evidence in criminal cases.
"There is no indication that these firearms were being held for that purpose," the motion states. "The Leesville Police Department has an evidence vault for that purpose."
Grayson, through the motion, also argues that Hickman's public authority defense was incomplete because it failed to specify the time period in which Hickman had the authority to possess the illegal weapons.
"It also fails to specify who in the federal government, with actual authority to do so, authorized him to possess such unlawful firearms while he was the Chief of the Leesville Police Department and after he was discharged from that position on Jan. 28, 2011," the motion continues.
Hickman is charged with two counts of possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number and one count of unlawful possession of an unregistered firearm. Earlier this week, Hickman, through his attorney, James Doyle, filed a motion to suppress all evidence found through search warrants conducted by the Leesville Police Department as well as a motion to dismiss all charges because of Hickman's public authority defense and that he did not possess the weapons in any position other than his duties as Leesville Chief of Police.
A trial date, in front of U.S. District Judge Richard T. Haik, is scheduled for Oct. 3 in Lafayette.
