As of October 2013, 200,000 concealed carry permits were issued in Wisconsin, and 5,800 applications were denied.    One denied applicant, Robert Evans, Jr., appealed.  The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has now ruled that he will not be getting his concealed carry permit, thanks to his 2002 conviction for Disorderly Conduct, contrary to Wis. Stat. 947.01.   Read the full opinion here.  Evans can still petition for reivew of the decision, but as the saying goes, "If you want to win an appeal, be the appellee."  This is especially true after losing at the first level.

The Court of Appeals determined that Mr. Evans' conviction for Disorderly Conduct fell within the gun ban of the Federal Firearms Act as a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(33)(A).  The court looked at the conviction and determined that it involved "use of physical force" because, examining the "limited class of documents, including charging documents, transcripts of plea colloquies, and jury instructions", the first "element" of his conviction involved “violent, abusive and otherwise disorderly conduct.”  According to the court, the fact that Evan was convicted of "violent abusive and otherwise disorderly conduct" made it "a relatively easy case."

Importantly, the court kept the door open for those cases where the first element was stated "in the disjunctive", meaning it was stated as "violent, abusive, or otherwise disorderly conduct."  In my experience, the elements in La Crosse County and surrounding counties have almost always been stated that way.  There is still hope.

Another issues in Evan's appeal was whether his step-daughter, the "victim" of his offense.  The statue covers "a
current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the  victim, … a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, … a person who  is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or  guardian, or … a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim."   The issue was whether Evans was  “similarly situated” to a parent.  The court, construing the statute broadly, determined that he was.  It also made clear it would not look at the intricacies of the relationship to determine whether the step-parent was an parental figure.

If you want to possess a firearm again, let alone have a concealed carry permit, the most important thing is to simply avoid a conviction for Disorderly Conduct.  Many are lured into a plea thinking it will be a fine only.  There are often long-term consequences.   If you are never convicted, you don't have to spend years of time and energy parsing words with your lawyer trying to get your rights back.  However, as this opinion suggests, if you are convicted of DC, then parsing words may be exactly what you want to do.  The way the first element is/was framed may affect whether you fall within the dreaded gun ban.

If you are ever charged with criminal Disorderly Conduct under circumstances that are considered "domestic", you could lose your right to possess or purchase a firearm for life.  Robert W. Evans Jr. found that out.  He is appealing the Wisconsin DOJ's denial of his application for a concealed carry permit.  His application was denied because he was convicted in 2002 of criminal Disorderly Conduct relative to an incident involving his adult stepdaughter, whom he reportedly admitted he had "pushed."    

Disorderly Conduct, or "DC", is prohibited by Wis. Stat.  947.01, which outlaws "engag[ing] in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise disorderly conduct under circumstances in which the conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance." (emphasis added.)  This is unbelievably broad language, and unbelievably, it has survived a constitutional challenge on the grounds of overbreadth.  When it comes to disturbances, I tell people, "If the police arrive and you were one of the reasons they are called, you could be arrested and charged with DC."    

Many, many people pleaded guilty or no contest to Disorderly Conduct believing it was just a minor offense.  Like Mr. Evans, they later got a rude awakening.  Not only can their applications for concealed carry be denied, but they could be charged criminally for possessing a firearm, under the Federal Firearms Act.  Attempts to undwind the conviction on the grounds that they were unaware of the ban when they pleaded were rejected, on the grounds that the ban is a "collateral" consequence of the conviction and not, therefore, grounds for a "do over."

Since 1996, the so-called Lautenberg Amendment to the Federal Firearms Act has prohibited gun possession by anyone convicted of a misdemeanor that "has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the 
threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim."  18 U.S.C. §921(a)(33)(A), (g)(9) (emphasis added.).

A recent 2nd Amendment challenge to the federal ban did not end well in the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals for Steven Skoien, a man convicted of DC and, subsequently, the federal act. The challenge to the Wisconsin DOJ's application denial is not 2nd Amendment based.  It hinges on interpretations of the language of the federal statute and Wisconsin Disorderly Conduct statute.  The arguments by the appellant and DOJ are quite complicated, but can be accessed here (Appellant, Respondent, Reply) if you want to try to follow them. 

My thoughts?  Don't get convicted in the first place.  I have kept many people charged with Disorderly Conduct in La Crosse County and surrounding counties from losing their 2nd Amendment rights.