New Jersey Hunters banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,579 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This was on courier news website.

CLINTON TOWNSHIP — A Windy Hill Road man is free on $25,000 bail after he was arrested Aug. 22 on weapons charges when police responded to reports of gunshots in the neighborhood.


After receiving calls of 20 to 30 shots being fired, Patrolman David Formalarie arrived in the cul-de-sac at about 6:20 p.m., heard gunshots and discovered homeowner Jimmy Guadagno, 44, holding a red cup with an alcoholic beverage and a strong odor of alcohol on his breath, police said.

Guadagno initially denied firing a gun, but officers observed a .22 caliber rifle and many spent rounds on the ground nearby, according to police.

On further investigation, Formalarie discovered Guadagno to be in possession of an AR-15 rifle, a .357 magnum pistol with a speed loader, two shotguns with pistol grips, a gravity knife, handcuffs, brass knuckles, a large amount of ammunition and a large sword, the police report said.

When Guadagno could not produce a firearms identification card, officers arrested him on charges of unlawful weapons possession, possession of handcuffs and disorderly conduct, police said.

Guadagno was taken to the Hunterdon County Jail and was released after posting $25,000 bail.

Township Patrolman Matthew Murphy, Detective Paul Bate and officers from the Town of Clinton assisted.




--------Besides the handcuffs, the brass knuckles, and whatever a gravity knife is, why did this guy get arrested? I thought you were allowed to target shoot on your property.

And what is the fine line with the FID in this case? I can understand needing it for the handgun, but for the shotguns and .22 ?

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20090825/NEWS/908250342&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,824 Posts
And what is the fine line with the FID in this case? I can understand needing it for the handgun, but for the shotguns and .22 ?
First, a NJ FPID is only for long guns. It does not apply in any way to handguns.

If the firearms were obtained legally there is no need for a NJ FPID in this case. I'm sure they would have arrested him even if he had one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,592 Posts
When Guadagno could not produce a firearms identification card

Again the debate can start. I though FID is only needed for purchase of firearms, not to legally possess them legally. What if he moved here from a free state like VA or PA and legally purchesed them in his previous state of residence. Also it didnt say how much land the guy had. He could have owned 50 acres and been target shooting in his yard. It didnt say he actally saw the guy firing either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
791 Posts
"On further investigation, Formalarie discovered Guadagno to be in possession of an AR-15 rifle, a .357 magnum pistol with a speed loader, two shotguns with pistol grips, a gravity knife, handcuffs, brass knuckles, a large amount of ammunition and a large sword, the police report said."

Again.....was his home entered illegaly? why were they searching in his home? The home is more protected than anywhere else, as the PD should know. I hope that there is more than a disorderly persons charge giving rise to PC for an arrest and subsequent search of his private property without warrant.
Could be some creative writing to make this crap sandwich go better come trial time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,592 Posts
Again.....was his home entered illegaly? why were they searching in his home? The home is more protected than anywhere else, as the PD should know. I hope that there is more than a disorderly persons charge giving rise to PC for an arrest and subsequent search of his private property without warrant.
Could be some creative writing to make this crap sandwich go better come trial time.

Classic case of keep looking through the book till we find a charge that fits [sort of]. This guy is still going to go through the wringer w lawyer fees. If he is aquiitted, the town should have to reimburse him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
791 Posts
"When Guadagno could not produce a firearms identification card, officers arrested him on charges of unlawful weapons possession, possession of handcuffs and disorderly conduct, police said."

no FID is needed for any of those guns. and the unlawful weapons possession could mean the discharge of the guns. handcuffs could be illegal but not if they are in his home(I'm sure they weren't in his back pocket), and well, the disorderly conduct was just him yelling at them to get out of his home. If this was a man of means, it could be a civil suit if the arrest was unlawful. 4th amendment is very sacred.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,592 Posts
Guadagno initially denied firing a gun, but officers observed a .22 caliber rifle and many spent rounds on the ground nearby, according to police.

How about if he had an 18 year old son target shooting under his supervision that decided to have a beer afterwards??? If no one saw him actually shooting the gun, then it's his statement against the cop's assumption. This guy was on private property and wasnt holding a smoking gun whern cops pulled up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
791 Posts
Guadagno initially denied firing a gun, but officers observed a .22 caliber rifle and many spent rounds on the ground nearby, according to police.

Does the denial,spent shells and the alcohol have anything to do with the search?
remember it is not what happened but what is in the report that will be testified to? Denial is not illegal, spent shells are not illegal, they could be reasonable suspicion depending on how old and freshly shot they are. and alcohol is not illegal even being intoxicated on your own property is not illegal. Unless something is not included there seems to be more questions than answers. Could the defendent have been coerced or intimidated or tricked into confession. "your honor, my client was not mirandized and under the influence of alcohol at the time the police interogated him".

How does an officer go from a call of shots heard in woods, to arrest of an individual, to a full blown search of an individuals home coming up with probably his entire firearms collection of 3 guns and confiscating a sword? Why would police confiscate a sword, brass knuckles, and cuffs and ammunition, are they part of the search warrant or the initial charge. Even if a search warrant was given on some unforseen basis, those items are not illegal. I don't know how the incident went down, but if the man was cuffed and under arrest and officers went into his home to perform a search without a warrant or exigent circumstances, this will be an easy one for a defense attorney and an embarrasing mistake for the PD. Now, if the man was arrested, they obtained a search warrant for "whatever the reason", usually "endangering public safety" and the judge ruled that the defendent not possess firearms then that is a different story, but what are you doing taking a sword?, was he allowed knives and wood axes. see where this goes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
Something sounds a little off with this story. I'd love to hear how this plays out in the end. Given just the facts presented, I think this was a bad search and bad arrest. The lawyers should have fun with this one. Sadly, it's going to cost this guy a bunch of money up front.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,176 Posts
First off-an FPID has two purposes: 1) it allows the holder to purchase long guns, 2) it allows the holder to possess long guns. The way the law is written in NJ it is illegal to possess any gun (long gun or hand gun) without being in possession of an FPID. There are a substantial number of exceptions to the "possession" side of the law-such as while hunting with a valid hunting license, or in or about your home or place of business(as appears to be the case here). The exceptions to the rule practicakkly swallow the rule itself-so most people-incorrectly assume that an FPID is not required to possess firearms.

As for this guys conduct-there is no indication that he was intoxicated-the fact that he had a beer is not relevant. When I was working lawenforcement in Florida, and was competative shooting on the pistol team-we would often take a shot or drink a beer before a round-to "calm the jitters" it actually made you a better competative shooter. (I'm not saying that this is what this guy was doing)

As for his personal situation-no it was likley not illegal for him to be in possession of any of those weapons on his property-as for shooting the .22, if the town has a nodischarge ordinance, he may have problems, but if there is no such ordinance, shooting in his yard was likley legal.

But the law as respects the gravity knife is pretty clear-he was in possession of an illegal weapon. I'm not sure how handcuffs play into this-I don't know of any law that makes ownership of handcuffs illegal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,477 Posts
But the law as respects the gravity knife is pretty clear-he was in possession of an illegal weapon
while on face value that sounds about right a strong gut feeling tells me that the whole search of his house an property to/that secured the weapons in question whether they are his legal or not was done "illegally", as no were do I read about a search warrant being issued to search this mans house and even if it was, which I strongly doutb, I would bet the farm it was for the weapon in question only (IE a 22rifle ONLY) Unless someone is a psychic and foreseen the pending weapons found.

This case sounds like someone over stepped there bounds with in the law and it wasn’t the guy in question, most of this will get tossed out of court and they will play the down grade charges game to get him to cop to something less of a serious charge in order to save face, I hope he heirs himself a really good lawyer that wont let them steam roll him on there mistakes.

I'm not knocking the officers here by any means but based on the facts of this story so far this sounds like the only one breaking the state laws was NOT the one arested [confused]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,464 Posts
I'm not sure how handcuffs play into this-I don't know of any law that makes ownership of handcuffs illegal
2C:39-3k

"Handcuffs. Any person who knowingly has in his possession handcuffs as defined in P.L.1991, c.437 (C.2C:39-9.2), under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as handcuffs may have, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense. A law enforcement officer shall confiscate handcuffs possessed in violation of the law."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,477 Posts
under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as handcuffs may have
Gotta love vaguely written laws, This reads like a the law is written as to say ; an officer can arrest you IF he wants to [confused]
You kinky dudes better dump the cuffs [hihi][hihi]
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top