In re Metheney

441 S.E.2d 655, 190 W. Va. 692, 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 19
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 17, 1994
DocketNo. 21889
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 441 S.E.2d 655 (In re Metheney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Metheney, 441 S.E.2d 655, 190 W. Va. 692, 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 19 (W. Va. 1994).

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

Wesley W. Metheney appeals the denial of his application to obtain a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon pursuant to W.Va. Code 61-7-4 [1989]. Mr. Metheney main[693]*693tains that the denial of his application was an abuse of discretion. Because the record clearly demonstrates that Mr. Metheney should be granted a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon, we reverse the order of the circuit court and remand the case with directions that the circuit court grant Mr. Metheney his license.

This is Mr. Metheney’s third appeal to this Court concerning the rejection of his application. In In re Application of Metheney, 182 W.Va. 722, 391 S.E.2d 635 (1990) (Metheney I), we noted that Mr. Metheney and several other applicants had been denied applications to carry a concealed deadly weapon. Although disagreeing with the contentions of the Metheney I applicants1, we found that W.Va.Code 61-7-4 [1989] allows a circuit court the discretion “to examine the assertions made by applicants for a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon....” Metheney I, 182 W.Va. at 725, 391 S.E.2d at 638. In Syllabus Point 2, Metheney I, we said:

West Virginia Code § 61-7-4 (1989) sets out the eight specific requirements necessary to obtain a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon. If the judge determines that the specific requirements have been satisfied, then the circuit court must issue the license. However, the circuit court also has the power to examine the assertions made by the applicants to determine if the reasons are valid. If the court determines that the statute has not been satisfied, the petition for the license will be denied and an order issued with the court’s findings of fact.

Based on Metheney I, the circuit court on remand held a hearing to examine Mr. Metheney’s assertions.2 During the hearing, in attempting to show that he meets the requirements of W.Va.Code 61-7-4 [1989], Mr. Metheney testified that he needs a concealed weapon for self-defense and defense of family and home. Mr. Metheney described several break-ins at his office and family farm as well as several incidents when he was threatened while attempting to conduct investigations on behalf of criminal defense clients. After hearing Mr. Metheney’s description of specific incidents, the circuit court found that although Mr. Metheney met the general requirements of W.Va.Code 61-7-4 [1989]3, Mr. Metheney’s reasons for [694]*694seeking a permit were insufficient to justify granting the requested permit. Following the circuit court’s third denial of his application, Mr. Metheney appealed to this Court.

According to the record the circuit court determined that Mr. Metheney met the eight specific requirements listed in W.Va. Code 61-7-4 [1989]. However, the circuit court found that in order to satisfy the requirement that “the applicant desires to carry such deadly weapon for the defense of self, family, home or state, or other lawful purpose” (W.Va.Code 61-7-4(a)(6) [1989]), it was incumbent that Mr. Metheney show a “particular special and compelling need ... to carry a concealed deadly weapon for the purposes of self-defense or the defense of family and home.” Although the circuit court has discretion to examine the assertions made by applicants to determine if the reasons are valid, W.Va.Code 61-7-4 [1989] does not require an applicant to show a “particular special and compelling need.” Given the statute’s specific requirements, a court’s review of an application cannot go behind the applicant’s assertions unless the court has reason to believe, or the facts imply, that the applicant might seek to carry the weapon for an unlawful purpose. In this case we find that the circuit court erred in requiring the showing of a compelling need.

Because the circuit court found that Mr. Metheney met the requirements set out in W.Va.Code 61-7-4 [1989], we reverse the de-cisión of the circuit court and remand the case to the circuit court with directions to issue Mr. Metheney a license to carry a concealed deadly weapon within ten days of the filing of this opinion.

For the above stated reasons, the judgment of the Circuit Court of Monongalia County is reversed and the case is remanded for the issuance of Mr. Metheney’s license to carry a concealed deadly weapon.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Application of Dailey
465 S.E.2d 601 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
441 S.E.2d 655, 190 W. Va. 692, 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-metheney-wva-1994.