Peter B. Thomas v. The Members of the City Council of Portland

First Circuit

Peter B. Thomas v. The Members of the City Council of Portland

730 F.2d 41, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24216

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedMarch 23, 1984

Docket83-1786

StatusPublished

Cited by22 cases

This text of 730 F.2d 41 (Peter B. Thomas v. The Members of the City Council of Portland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peter B. Thomas v. The Members of the City Council of Portland, 730 F.2d 41, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24216 (1st Cir. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Peter B. Thomas, argues that the City of Portland, Maine, and various city officials infringed his constitutional rights by denying him a permit to carry a concealed handgun. Established case law makes clear that the federal Constitution grants appellant no right to carry a concealed handgun. See, e.g., United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 178, 59 S.Ct. 816, 818, 83 L.Ed. 1206 (1939) (second amendment applies only to weapons that have a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.”); United States v. Oakes, 564 F.2d 384, 387 (10th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 926, 98 S.Ct. 1493, 55 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (same); United States v. Johnson, 497 F.2d 548, 550 (4th Cir.1974) (same); Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265, 6 S.Ct. 580, 584, 29 L.Ed. 615 (1886) (second amendment confers rights as against activity by the “federal government only”); Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove, 695 F.2d 261, 269-70 (7th Cir.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 194, 78 L.Ed.2d 170 (1983) (same); Cases v. United States, 131 F.2d 916, 921 (1st Cir.1942), cert. denied, 319 U.S. 770, 63 S.Ct. 1431, 87 L.Ed. 1718 (1943) (same); United States v. Warin, 530 F.2d 103, 106 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 948, 96 S.Ct. 3168, 49 L.Ed.2d 1185 (1976) (second amendment grants right to the state, not the individual); Stevens v. United States, 440 F.2d 144, 149 (6th Cir.1971) (same). See Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55, 65 n. 8, 100 S.Ct. 915, 920 n. 8, 63 L.Ed.2d 198 (1980). Principles of res judicata bar appellant’s remaining claims against the chief of police. Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education, — U.S.—, 104 S.Ct. 892, 79 L.Ed.2d 56 (1984). And, the opinion of the magistrate, adopted by the district court, adequately discusses any other of appellant’s claims. The judgment of the district court, dismissing appellant’s case, is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Peter B. Thomas, argues that the City of Portland, Maine, and various city officials infringed his constitutional rights by denying him a permit to carry a concealed handgun. Established case law makes clear that the federal Constitution grants appellant no right to carry a concealed handgun. See, e.g., United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 178, 59 S.Ct. 816, 818, 83 L.Ed. 1206 (1939) (second amendment applies only to weapons that have a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.”); United States v. Oakes, 564 F.2d 384, 387 (10th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 926, 98 S.Ct. 1493, 55 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (same); United States v. Johnson, 497 F.2d 548, 550 (4th Cir.1974) (same); Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265, 6 S.Ct. 580, 584, 29 L.Ed. 615 (1886) (second amendment confers rights as against activity by the “federal government only”); Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove, 695 F.2d 261, 269-70 (7th Cir.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 194, 78 L.Ed.2d 170 (1983) (same); Cases v. United States, 131 F.2d 916, 921 (1st Cir.1942), cert. denied, 319 U.S. 770, 63 S.Ct. 1431, 87 L.Ed. 1718 (1943) (same); United States v. Warin, 530 F.2d 103, 106 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 948, 96 S.Ct. 3168, 49 L.Ed.2d 1185 (1976) (second amendment grants right to the state, not the individual); Stevens v. United States, 440 F.2d 144, 149 (6th Cir.1971) (same). See Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55, 65 n. 8, 100 S.Ct. 915, 920 n. 8, 63 L.Ed.2d 198 (1980). Principles of res judicata bar appellant’s remaining claims against the chief of police. Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education, — U.S.—, 104 S.Ct. 892, 79 L.Ed.2d 56 (1984). And, the opinion of the magistrate, adopted by the district court, adequately discusses any other of appellant’s claims. The judgment of the district court, dismissing appellant’s case, is

Affirmed.

96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2323, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3934 Douglas Ray Hickman v. Sherman Block Claude L. Farris Patrick G. Leonard City of Los Angeles Darryl Gates, Police Chief Robert Talcott Herbert Boekmann Reva B. Tooley Samuel L. Williams Stephen D. Yslas William Cowdin Frank E. Piersol Dominick J. Rivetti City of San Fernando County of Los Angeles

81 F.3d 98 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)

Hickman v. Block

81 F.3d 98 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

730 F.2d 41, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 24216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peter-b-thomas-v-the-members-of-the-city-council-of-portland-ca1-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack