PA Bill Number: HB1472
Title: In primary and election expenses, further providing for reporting by candidate and political committees and other persons and for late contributions ...
Description: In primary and election expenses, further providing for reporting by candidate and political committees and other persons and for late contrib ...
Last Action: Referred to STATE GOVERNMENT
Last Action Date: Apr 22, 2024
ACLU files lawsuit against North Smithfield police over seizure of guns :: 04/24/2015
NORTH SMITHFIELD – The ACLU today filed a lawsuit in federal district court on behalf of a North Smithfield resident, seeking the return of weapons that were seized from him over six years ago by the local police department and which the department still refuses to return to him.
The lawsuit, filed by RI ACLU volunteer attorney Thomas W. Lyons on behalf of Jason Richer, argues that the North Smithfield Police Department violated his right to due process and his right to keep and bear arms by retaining his property without just cause. The ACLU successfully filed a similar lawsuit against the Cranston Police Department three years ago.
According to the suit, in September 2008, police responded to Richer’s house when his now ex-wife called to express concern that he had tried to harm himself.
"Although Richer explained that he was not suicidal and that his wife had misconstrued a conversation they had, police forced him to submit to a mental health evaluation at Landmark Hospital," a press release on the suit explained. "The doctor who saw him there discharged him shortly after his arrival, and no charges were ever filed or any other action taken. In the meantime, police seized 'for safe keeping' three lawfully registered guns from a locked case in Richer’s garage. Two months later, when Richer tried to retrieve the guns, police refused to return them, telling him he would need to obtain a court order."
According to officials from the ACLU, both Richer's ex-wife and a psychologist provided letters to the department in support of returning the guns to him, but the department still refused to do so. Over the years, they say Richer has repeated his request for the return of the weapons, but he has been consistently rebuffed.
In March, the ACLU wrote a letter to the police chief on Richer’s behalf, but also received no response, prompting the filing of the lawsuit.
The lawsuit claims that the police department’s practice of requiring “weapons owners who are not charged with a crime to engage in formal litigation in order to recover their seized property” violates Richer’s due process and Second Amendment rights. The suit seeks a court order declaring the police department’s practice unconstitutional and requiring the return of his weapons, as well as an award of monetary damages.
“The North Smithfield Police Department has no legitimate reason to keep these guns. This is a clear violation of Mr. Richer’s constitutional rights,” said Lyons.
Richer added "I am resolved to do all I can to end the unconstitutional practices and procedures employed by the North Smithfield Police Department. From the moment my firearms were seized, I have been asked to prove that I am fit to have them returned, and all the proof I have provided has been dismissed and ignored. This flies in the face of the presumption of innocence we enjoy as Americans. This practice must be stopped.”
In 2012, the ACLU reportedly filed a virtually identical suit against the Cranston Police Department, which settled the case by returning the weapons that had been unlawfully held, agreeing to make any necessary repairs to the weapons while they had been confiscated, and paying monetary damages and attorneys’ fees.
“Police cannot seize a person’s property for safekeeping and then keep it indefinitely," said ACLU of RI Executive Director Steven Brown. "Mr. Richer has been extraordinarily patient, yet the police have done nothing but make excuses about returning his property to him. Police departments must learn that the Constitution simply does not allow them to arbitrarily keep the property of innocent residents.”
