Notice of Appeal to Ninth Circuit Filed in Montana Gun Free School Zone Case

Vivian and Gabriel’s modest home in Billings, Montana

A notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has been filed in the Gun-Free School Zone case in Billings, Montana.

The notice was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Montana, Billings Division, on August 6, 2024. The case was settled with a plea agreement on August 2, 2024. Judge Susan P. Waters did not impose a fine or prison time, but Gabriel was sentenced to three years probation. The probation includes paying $75 per month for the costs of administering it.

During the court hearings, Gabriel Metcalf preserved the right to appeal through his federal attorney, Russel Hart. From the Notice of Appeal:

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Defendant GABRIEL COWAN METCALF, appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from the Judgment filed and entered against him in the District Court on August 2, 2024.This appeal is from the District Court’s denial of Mr. Metcalf’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment.

The issue was preserved pursuant to a plea agreement that was accepted by the District Court at the time of sentencing.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED August 6, 2024.

Gabriel has a clean record with no history of violence or criminal activity. He was repeatedly told by Billings police officers, in person and in media interviews by police officials, that he was exercising his rights when he was outside his home with a single-shot Rossi Shotgun. Gabriel and his mother had been stalked by a neighbor who assaulted Gabriel. The neighbor had been convicted of assault and violating a court order of protection.

Part of the plea deal was for Gabriel to forfeit the Rossi single shot shotgun and the six rounds of ammunition, which was found when the federal task force served the warrant to search his and his mother’s home.

This case is very clean, without other issues of criminality. It makes for a good challenge to the Gun-Free School Zone Act (GFSZA).  Montana and, therefore, Billings are in the Ninth District Court of Appeals, which has a history of defying the Supreme Court on Second Amendment cases.  Gabriel has a chance of winning with a three-judge panel in the Ninth Circuit. The record of the Ninth Circuit is such: if a three-judge panel rules in favor of the Second Amendment, the case will be re-heard en banc, and the en banc panel will reverse the case. This only leaves an appeal to the Supreme Court.

There is another case challenging the Gun Free School Zone Act playing out in the Fifth Circuit in Texas.  The case in the Fifth Circuit has attracted the attention of the California Rifle and Pistol Association and the Second Amendment Foundation. They have filed an amicus (friend of the court) brief. Now that the Billings case is being formally appealed, amicus briefs may be filed for it.

The GFSZA was already found to be unconstitutional in 1995, because it was not a valid use of federal power. President Clinton and his Attorney General Janet Reno pushed to have 12 words in the act changed, which some courts have found to render the act acceptable under the Constitution. The current challenge is based on the Second Amendment, not the Commerce Clause.

Gabriel and his mother, Vivian, are barely scraping by in Billings.  Gabriel’s mother, Vivian, has set up a GiveSendGo account to aid in defense of their home and the expenses arising from the case.


About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Dean Weingarten

Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
OlTrailDog

It seems to me that the end results will be a GFSZ will be restricted to the property encompassed by the school. That is to say, there will still be GFSZ for perps to take advantage of, but they will be reduced to the physical school property. Best of luck to the Metcalfs and may common sense rule the day. F’n nitwits.

Whatstheuseanyway

This man was on his own private property. How can a school zone include private property? Isn’t that called a taking; a deprivation of rights by a government?

swmft

when did the constitution keep goobers from enforcing edicts , need a mechanism to jail police for violations of constitution that does not need government to jail their own

Finnky

I think allegations include Metcalf entering sidewalk and/or stepping into the street. While street is validly public property – as I understand sidewalk is a public easement across home’s property, making it private property open to the public but still private property. Given Metcalf’s clear need to be ready for self defense without notice, this could make an excellent test case to SCOTUS. Next door neighbor was obviously bigger and enough stronger to cause significant harm even if not armed, had made death threats and repeatedly violated restraining orders requiring that he not approach Metcalf or his mother. Also was… Read more »

Tionico

Certainly he fact that the “gun free one” etends to millions of square miles of private and public property. this is certain;y an unlawful taking. I don’t remember when this stupidity was anshrined into law, but I am pretty certain I was in my present home, which I bought in 1990. I clearly remember being shocked when I realised that there is NO ROUE between this home and any freeway passing through this town that did ot bring me within 1000 feet of some school propery. This was key in my decision toget my Mother May I Card, which gives… Read more »

gregs

that congress included property NOT included as part of a school into this legislation should render it null and void. it should be re-named the gun free school zone + act.
you do not (well, at least should not) lose or forfeit your civil rights just because you are walking or driving past a school while possessing a firearm (a Second Amendment right).

https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/senate-bill/2070/text

Dubi Loo

Thanks Traitor Joe

Jerry C.

Again, Constitutional Rights exist on every square inch of U.S. soil or they exist not at all. You cannot prohibit free exercise of any right, anywhere, without setting precedent allowing prohibition of any right, anywhere.

musicman44mag

They took his shotgun and ammo? Why????? Was it used in a murder or self defense? No, it was not used at all. Give him his shit back and drop the case. Parts of Montana have turned into shithole kommiefornia ever since they moved there and invaded. Typical comiefornians. Uncle Bill and Janet we are going to burn your house down and kill you Reno should not have been allowed to amend the law to make it what they wanted after their first attempt and government control over the citizens weaponry failed. Just like bill, carter, obidum, obummer and kamalatoe,… Read more »

Logician

Why didn’t he just demand to see a hand written and signed guarantee of getting a fair trial? If any trial is actually going to be a fair one, then who would possibly object to fulfilling that demand? Or, are we supposed to just pay our money and take our chances in the 100% corrupted legal system?? So far, no one has been able to prove my analysis of the legal system to be wrong at all in any way, the only thing that I hear, is CRICKETS!!

Finnky

He could and may have demanded such a letter. Such demand would either illicit laughter or simply be ignored.

What would point of such letter be anyway? Court believes it is being fair – pretty much regardless.

Logician

Could have and may have? Are you joking there? Why would it elicit laughter or be ignored? If you cannot see the point of something so simple, it’s amazing that you are able to feed yourself! Evidently, you are unable to see the difference between being told that you have a guarantee of getting a fair and speedy trial, and actually getting one! If you bought a car, paid for it in full, would you consider that to be the same thing as having it delivered into your possession?? What would you do if the car never arrived in your… Read more »