Open Carry and School Property

[mpearce]

As there is no legal beagle section on here, I thought I would post this here.  After having been asked about this particular law several times, I thought I would clarify what I know to all on here.  The law is MCL 28.425o(a).  The law says "an individual under this act to carry a concealed pistol, or who is exempt from licensure under section 12a(f), shall not carry a concealed pistol o the premise of . . . a school or school property except that a parent or legal guardian (emphasis added) of a student of the school is not precluded from carrying a concealed pistol while in a vehicle on school property, if he or she is dropping the student off at the school or picking up the child from the school.  As used in this section, "school" and "school property" mean those terms as defined in section 237a of the Michigan penal code . . . MCL 750.237a"

So based on my personal experience with this section in the court system (limited exposure not statewide), if you are not a parent or legal guardian of a student of the school and you are not dropping off or picking up your child, then you have violated this law.

What won't work: Grandparent picking up after school; Parent taking child to school property to play on weekends and child does not attend the school; Taking the neighbor's child to the school and your child is home sick; or Parent driving onto school property to attend parent-teacher conference without your child.

What is questionable:  driving to school to watch your child participate in an afterschool sport or club and then taking your child home; a parent attending a private tutoring lesson with their child at the school and the tutor rents space from the school.

Finally, the last two parts of this equation are the county prosecutor and the judge that will be ultimately assigned to try the case. As the prosecutor sets the tone and the judge has the final say.

What can you do to avoid violating this section.  Park off of school property (be sure to find out exactly where school property ends), switch to open carry and walk onto the school grounds.  Also remember that if you do not have a CPL (not called a ccw because that is a felony in this state and not interchangeable), you cannot carry in any way on school property (see MCL 750.234d).

[TheQ]

Would you like a legal beagle section?

You are the only resident lawyer that I know is here.

Other lay people may want a section like this?

[CV67PAT]

After reading the 2 statutes about schools I have concluded that premises does not include the parking lots. So a person could conceivably CC outside their vehicle in the parking lots only. Step over the curb and you're on school property.

Now insofar as driving and dropping off your child on school property would be like driving around back to the sports field to drop your child off. You are no longer in the parking lot. But you are on the school property as defined in the statute.

I think the two relevant statues are:
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-28-425o
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-237a

[mpearce]

Would you like a legal beagle section?

You are the only resident lawyer that I know is here.

Other lay people may want a section like this?

I think it would help, especially with the number of videos/recordings that I have watched/listened to on YouTube at the meeting on TeamSpeak.  I heard some really good response to police encounters and some iffy ones.  I would not mind assisting you out on that.

[CV67PAT]

Might I suggest that it be in the member's section. The other gun forum has theirs in the open forum and a lot of jailhouse lawyers like to practice there. Non MOC members could utilize that resource. Thereby reducing the conflicting opinions.

Maybe I could be the moderator... LOL!!!

[mpearce]

After reading the 2 statutes about schools I have concluded that premises does not include the parking lots.

I think the two relevant statues are:
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-28-425o
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-237a

750.237a states that a person is not violation of the weapons free school zone act if they are licensed for concealed carry or are transporting in the prescribed manner.  However, 28.425o clearly states that one may not conceal carry at a school or on school property.  I stand corrected on 750.234d as I lumped school in with prohibited places for firearm possession.  However, this does not change the fact that there are judges out there that are reading 28.425o literally.  You must be a parent or legal guardian dropping of your student or picking up your student from school.  No exceptions not even for when school is not in session.  As far as a I can tell there is no published appellate case on point.

This is where careful and detailed reading of the law is crucial.  Too often, one can read what they want to be there (even attorneys), until one is looking on how to defeat a criminal charge. 

In Clarkston, the judge was not clear on whether the parking lot exception would apply if your child did not attend the school.

[CV67PAT]

In Clarkston, the judge was not clear on whether the parking lot exception would apply if your child did not attend the school.

That judge obviously had not read 28.425o(1)(h)(3)
"As used in subsection (1), "premises" does not include parking areas of the places identified under subsection (1)."

[mpearce]

In Clarkston, the judge was not clear on whether the parking lot exception would apply if your child did not attend the school.

That judge obviously had not read 28.425o(1)(h)(3)
"As used in subsection (1), "premises" does not include parking areas of the places identified under subsection (1)."

Oh he read it.  He just wasn't going there since the facts indicated that the Defendant has stepped off of the parking lot while concealed carrying according to an eyewitness.  This is where the law gets tricky.  It is applied to the fact-specific case.  Bad facts equals a bad legal precedent being made (case law that interpreted a statute).  I don't recommend anyone attempt to become that first case on the issue unless the facts are within total compliance of the law as it is written and then applied badly.

[CV67PAT]

Well anything involving High Carbon Steel Government Model can not be used as any sort of example. Well except how NOT to do anything.

After all, according to HCSGM, his "stoner buddy could have done a better job" defending him in that particular case.

Back to that case for a moment though. That discussion was after having found the defendant responsible for carrying a concealed pistol on school property. And in that case the judge ruled properly. Once the defendant stepped over the curb from the parking lot onto school property with a concealed pistol he was in violation of 28.425o, regardless of what he was doing.

Now had he been open carrying he would have not been in violation. But, given the defendant's propensity for not being truthful, I also believe the testimony of the eye witness.

[mpearce]

Well anything involving High Carbon Steel Government Model can not be used as any sort of example. Well except how NOT to do anything.

After all, according to HCSGM, his "stoner buddy could have done a better job" defending him in that particular case.

Back to that case for a moment though. That discussion was after having found the defendant responsible for carrying a concealed pistol on school property. And in that case the judge ruled properly. Once the defendant stepped over the curb from the parking lot onto school property with a concealed pistol he was in violation of 28.425o, regardless of what he was doing.

Now had he been open carrying he would have not been in violation. But, given the defendant's propensity for not being truthful, I also believe the testimony of the eye witness.

The point is one has to know exactly what the law says is legal and is not.  Then do 150 percent to ensure personal compliance with the law's mandates.  Then if confronted by an officer, whether based on a MWAG call or not, be polite, remain SILENT, and contact a knowledge criminal defense attorney that is also knowledgeable in firearms issues and laws. 

There are members of the defense bar that will not care about one's Second Amendment rights and merely try to turn the case over quickly.  Another pointer for any firearms owner is to ask a defense attorney if they are knowledge in firearms rights, CPL laws, as well as the charged offense.  If not, then seek one out who is.  Finally, do as advised by your attorney.  After all, why would one pay a couple hundreds of dollars per hour (some defense attorneys do charge a flat fee instead of hourly) for representation and then not do as told?

I am still trying to answer that question myself.

[CV67PAT]

Finally, do as advised by your attorney.

^^^^THIS^^^^

[Bronson]

After all, why would one pay a couple hundreds of dollars per hour (some defense attorneys do charge a flat fee instead of hourly) for representation and then not do as told?

Because "one" is an idiot.

Bronson

[METL]

This is good info in this thread...    I was recently wondering about just this type of situation with regards to after school activities...   Also, being that the after school stuff isn't always at their own school, yet still in district, how will that stack up? 

I better mind my Ps and Qs...  I would just OC, but there is some political stuff involved there too... 

I find it hard to believe I would have trouble with it left in the vehicle, especially in a nano-vault, but still... sounds like if someone got a hair, one could be in a world of hurt...   


Thanks for the insight MPEARCE.