The Court of Appeals relied on testimony establishing that
Senn could not reach the handgun while driving, but that testimony
did not speak to whether he could have reached it in
other driving situations, such as while the vehicle was stopped.
Neither § 28-1202 nor case law requires that the weapon be
within the defendant’s reach while driving in order to be considered
“on or about his person.” In fact, in Kennedy v. State,
171 Neb. 160, 170-71, 105 N.W.2d 710, 718 (1960), where the
defendant was one of several occupants in the vehicle, we held
that a weapon is concealed when it is hidden from ordinary
observation and is “readily accessible on [the] person [of] or
in a motor vehicle operated by [the] defendant.” (Emphasis
supplied). Further, in State v. Goodwin, 184 Neb. at 541, 169
N.W.2d at 273, we affirmed the jury’s factual finding and held
that a loaded pistol found in a locked glove compartment during
a postarrest search was concealed “on or about” the person
of the driver because it was concealed in an accessible location
over which the defendant had control.
Could not reach the handgun
while driving but it could be reached in
other driving situations ?
I'm a bit confused.
Anyway, the locked glove box appears to be very relevant. I'd wanna read Goodwin as well just to make sure... but anyway...
I think we need "readily accessible" defined. Cause it's kind of looking like the weapon HAS to be outside of the passenger area - which is somewhat impossible in several vehicle types. IE: a minivan, suv, compact car with a hatch back, etc.
Given my initial quote of the opinion/decision a couple posts a go, it looks like a domestic situation that might have involved a questionable character (I honestly dunno) - and that the concealed weapons charge decision is more or less "poisoning the tree" (legal / liberty term). Possibly bending the law in order "to get one bad guy". See also - "you have to invoke your 5th amendment rights in order for it to apply to you" that the SCOTUS did a couple years ago.
