Drizzt
Member
Judge upholds decision to deny dentist a gun permit
By Laura Waldon
Sun Newspapers
(Created 3/6/03 8:50:05 AM)
A Hennepin County District Court judge recently upheld the Edina police chief’s decision to deny a dentist a permit to carry a concealed handgun.
Following a six-day trial, District Court Judge David Duffy ruled Feb. 3 that Edina Police Chief Mike Siitari properly denied the permit to Edina resident Franz Metzger, who has a dental practice in St. Louis Park and a tree farm in Itasca County.
“[Metzger] has failed to show that the circumstance of his life result in any personal safety hazard justifying the issuance of a permit to carry a weapon,†according to Duffy’s ruling filed in District Court.
“I was quite disappointed with the outcome of [the trial],†Metzger said.
Metzger first applied for a permit to carry a pistol in 1994 and was granted that permit by former Edina Police Chief William Bernjhelm, District Court documents state. Bernjhelm renewed Metzger’s permit through 1999.
When Metzger reapplied for a permit in 2000, Siitari, who had recently been appointed as Edina’s new chief of police, denied the dentist’s request, according to District Court documents.
“This is my right and the city has agreed with me six previous times … in terms of the last police chief,†Metzger said. “I have been wronged. My right has been denied.â€
Siitari’s denial of renewal was based upon the grounds that “dentist and tree farm owner do not qualify as occupations or personal safety hazards that require a permit to carry,†court documents state.
In order to be granted a permit to carry a concealed weapon, a person must have an occupation or personal safety hazard requiring a permit to carry, according to Minnesota statute.
During the six-day September 2002 trial, Metzger argued that he met those requirements based on the grounds that he transports narcotics and precious metals to his office and has expensive equipment in his office, court documents state.
Under state law, Metzger can, without a permit, have a gun at home, at his office and in the parking lot.
He testified that he does have a gun in his office and is aware that he can have it there and at home without a permit, court documents state.
“Based upon this, Dr. Metzger’s perceived personal hazard is limited to the two- to three-mile drive between his home and his office,†Duffy stated.
Metzger also testified that his safety is exacerbated by the location of his office building in the 6600 block of Excelsior Boulevard in an area he describes as “high crime,†according to court documents. His testimony established that this claim was based on the office’s proximity to the nearby Meadowbrook housing complex.
However, St. Louis Park’s police chief informed Siitari that earlier problems at the Meadowbrook complex had been addressed and that the housing project is at this point a “success story,†court documents state. The judge found no evidence to suggest that the office complex is in a high-crime area.
During trial, Metzger also claimed that his family’s tree farm in Itasca County is located remote from law enforcement and that it had been burglarized and vandalized in the past, according to court documents.
An Itasca County investigator testified that the crime of arson had been committed on the tree farm when a two-car garage was burned, court documents state.
However, Metzger did not present any evidence establishing that the path to his tree farm is a particularly dangerous area frequented by criminals, nor did any evidence suggest that the tree farm itself was in a particularly dangerous area, Duffy stated.
The judge also noted that Metzger is entitled to carry a weapon without a permit on his property.
To support his case, Metzger hired two firms that specialize in risk assessment: Charles T. Thibodeau & Associates of Minneapolis and T. George & Associates of St. Paul.
“They both concluded that I’m at risk and I have a clearly foreseeable threat to my safety … and that I’m in real and immediate danger,†he said.
However, Duffy disagreed, stating that the evidence “fails to establish a reasonable basis for this dramatic claim†that Metzger’s “very life is at risk.â€
The judge stated that Metzger had failed to support his allegations with documentation and noted that he did not produce any police reports documenting alleged break-ins and confrontations at his office, court documents state.
Duffy also noted that Metzger has been transporting narcotics or dental metals since 1972 and has never been assaulted or attacked traveling between his home and office, and has never been confronted or threatened in his office parking lot, according to court documents.
“I don’t find it that medical professionals are being accosted and robbed for what they carry,†said Siitari.
“The judge confirmed my decision that he does not meet the standard in this state to get a carry permit,†Siitari added.
In 1998 and 1999, Bernjhelm approved 29 gun permits in Edina, Siitari reported. In 2000, Siitari approved 14 permits and denied four, and in 2001, he approved 10 and denied four. In the first six months of 2002, he has approved four and denied two.
“I think the big difference between Chief Bernjhelm and I is that I asked for proof,†Siitari said. “He did not demand the proof that I requested.â€
The city of Edina has spent more than $82,000 in staff time, attorney’s fees and court fees to uphold this decision, Siitari said.
Although this type of court proceeding usually only takes about half of a day, Duffy probably allowed the proceedings to go on for six days because “there is a lack of case law and I think he was aware this could be a case that becomes a significant case with regard to other permit applications, so he wanted to review it carefully,†Siitari said.
“There is absolutely no reason why the permit should be denied,†Metzger refuted. “I have done absolutely nothing to disqualify myself. I’m not a crook. I’m not an outlaw.â€
Metzger feels that he was denied the permit because of “the particular personal beliefs†of Siitari and Duffy, he said.
“I think that the decision illustrates the problem with the current law, leaving the decision to issue a permit to the discretion of the local police chief and then setting no objective standard for any court to apply,†said Metzger’s attorney, Elizabeth Carlson.
“Dr. Metzger has legitimate personal and business reasons for carrying a handgun,†Carlson said. “He had a permit issued to him for six years and then a different chief of police looked at the same facts and came to an opposite conclusion and denied the renewal.
“I think that under a fair system, it doesn’t matter who your chief of police is or who the judge is,†Carlson added. “What matters is who the applicant is and whether they meet objective criteria to be issued a permit.â€
Metzger has not yet decided if he plans to appeal the District Court judge’s decision to deny his permit, he said.
An appeal may not be necessary, though.
A bill that would establish a “shall issue†policy for permits to carry a concealed handgun in public is currently in committee in the Minnesota House of Representatives.
Under the bill, a sheriff would be required to issue a permit to a person unless the person is disqualified under specific, listed factors.
“I am against it,†Siitari said of the bill. “I do not think putting more guns out in the streets – even in te hands of good citizens – is going to make it a safer place.â€
The bill still must be approved at the committee level before going out onto the House floor for a vote. A companion bill has also been introduced in the state Senate.
By Laura Waldon
Sun Newspapers
(Created 3/6/03 8:50:05 AM)
A Hennepin County District Court judge recently upheld the Edina police chief’s decision to deny a dentist a permit to carry a concealed handgun.
Following a six-day trial, District Court Judge David Duffy ruled Feb. 3 that Edina Police Chief Mike Siitari properly denied the permit to Edina resident Franz Metzger, who has a dental practice in St. Louis Park and a tree farm in Itasca County.
“[Metzger] has failed to show that the circumstance
“I was quite disappointed with the outcome of [the trial],†Metzger said.
Metzger first applied for a permit to carry a pistol in 1994 and was granted that permit by former Edina Police Chief William Bernjhelm, District Court documents state. Bernjhelm renewed Metzger’s permit through 1999.
When Metzger reapplied for a permit in 2000, Siitari, who had recently been appointed as Edina’s new chief of police, denied the dentist’s request, according to District Court documents.
“This is my right and the city has agreed with me six previous times … in terms of the last police chief,†Metzger said. “I have been wronged. My right has been denied.â€
Siitari’s denial of renewal was based upon the grounds that “dentist and tree farm owner do not qualify as occupations or personal safety hazards that require a permit to carry,†court documents state.
In order to be granted a permit to carry a concealed weapon, a person must have an occupation or personal safety hazard requiring a permit to carry, according to Minnesota statute.
During the six-day September 2002 trial, Metzger argued that he met those requirements based on the grounds that he transports narcotics and precious metals to his office and has expensive equipment in his office, court documents state.
Under state law, Metzger can, without a permit, have a gun at home, at his office and in the parking lot.
He testified that he does have a gun in his office and is aware that he can have it there and at home without a permit, court documents state.
“Based upon this, Dr. Metzger’s perceived personal hazard is limited to the two- to three-mile drive between his home and his office,†Duffy stated.
Metzger also testified that his safety is exacerbated by the location of his office building in the 6600 block of Excelsior Boulevard in an area he describes as “high crime,†according to court documents. His testimony established that this claim was based on the office’s proximity to the nearby Meadowbrook housing complex.
However, St. Louis Park’s police chief informed Siitari that earlier problems at the Meadowbrook complex had been addressed and that the housing project is at this point a “success story,†court documents state. The judge found no evidence to suggest that the office complex is in a high-crime area.
During trial, Metzger also claimed that his family’s tree farm in Itasca County is located remote from law enforcement and that it had been burglarized and vandalized in the past, according to court documents.
An Itasca County investigator testified that the crime of arson had been committed on the tree farm when a two-car garage was burned, court documents state.
However, Metzger did not present any evidence establishing that the path to his tree farm is a particularly dangerous area frequented by criminals, nor did any evidence suggest that the tree farm itself was in a particularly dangerous area, Duffy stated.
The judge also noted that Metzger is entitled to carry a weapon without a permit on his property.
To support his case, Metzger hired two firms that specialize in risk assessment: Charles T. Thibodeau & Associates of Minneapolis and T. George & Associates of St. Paul.
“They both concluded that I’m at risk and I have a clearly foreseeable threat to my safety … and that I’m in real and immediate danger,†he said.
However, Duffy disagreed, stating that the evidence “fails to establish a reasonable basis for this dramatic claim†that Metzger’s “very life is at risk.â€
The judge stated that Metzger had failed to support his allegations with documentation and noted that he did not produce any police reports documenting alleged break-ins and confrontations at his office, court documents state.
Duffy also noted that Metzger has been transporting narcotics or dental metals since 1972 and has never been assaulted or attacked traveling between his home and office, and has never been confronted or threatened in his office parking lot, according to court documents.
“I don’t find it that medical professionals are being accosted and robbed for what they carry,†said Siitari.
“The judge confirmed my decision that he does not meet the standard in this state to get a carry permit,†Siitari added.
In 1998 and 1999, Bernjhelm approved 29 gun permits in Edina, Siitari reported. In 2000, Siitari approved 14 permits and denied four, and in 2001, he approved 10 and denied four. In the first six months of 2002, he has approved four and denied two.
“I think the big difference between Chief Bernjhelm and I is that I asked for proof,†Siitari said. “He did not demand the proof that I requested.â€
The city of Edina has spent more than $82,000 in staff time, attorney’s fees and court fees to uphold this decision, Siitari said.
Although this type of court proceeding usually only takes about half of a day, Duffy probably allowed the proceedings to go on for six days because “there is a lack of case law and I think he was aware this could be a case that becomes a significant case with regard to other permit applications, so he wanted to review it carefully,†Siitari said.
“There is absolutely no reason why the permit should be denied,†Metzger refuted. “I have done absolutely nothing to disqualify myself. I’m not a crook. I’m not an outlaw.â€
Metzger feels that he was denied the permit because of “the particular personal beliefs†of Siitari and Duffy, he said.
“I think that the decision illustrates the problem with the current law, leaving the decision to issue a permit to the discretion of the local police chief and then setting no objective standard for any court to apply,†said Metzger’s attorney, Elizabeth Carlson.
“Dr. Metzger has legitimate personal and business reasons for carrying a handgun,†Carlson said. “He had a permit issued to him for six years and then a different chief of police looked at the same facts and came to an opposite conclusion and denied the renewal.
“I think that under a fair system, it doesn’t matter who your chief of police is or who the judge is,†Carlson added. “What matters is who the applicant is and whether they meet objective criteria to be issued a permit.â€
Metzger has not yet decided if he plans to appeal the District Court judge’s decision to deny his permit, he said.
An appeal may not be necessary, though.
A bill that would establish a “shall issue†policy for permits to carry a concealed handgun in public is currently in committee in the Minnesota House of Representatives.
Under the bill, a sheriff would be required to issue a permit to a person unless the person is disqualified under specific, listed factors.
“I am against it,†Siitari said of the bill. “I do not think putting more guns out in the streets – even in te hands of good citizens – is going to make it a safer place.â€
The bill still must be approved at the committee level before going out onto the House floor for a vote. A companion bill has also been introduced in the state Senate.
