Runions v. Burchett
Case Details
- Judge(s)
- Donovan
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Published
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- appeal
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Outcome
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision upholding the sheriff's denial of Runions's concealed carry license application based on his prior felony convictions, finding that a gubernatorial pardon does not relieve the disability imposed by statute for CCL eligibility purposes.
Excerpt
Trial court did not err when it denied appellant's application for a concealed carry license (CCL) based upon three felony convictions for which he been pardoned by the governor of Ohio. Significantly, his pardon does not equate with a sealing or expungement of his convictions pursuant to sections 2151.355 to 2151.358, sections 2953.31 to 2953.36, or section 2953.37 of the Revised Code. Since appellant was not convicted of a felony "offense of violence" pursuant to R.C. 2923.13(A)(2), none of his felony convictions caused him to be placed under disability to carry or possess a firearm pursuant to R.C. 2923.13. Because appellant was not under disability, there is no disability to remove. Thus, the pardon did not relieve appellant "under operation of law or legal process from any disability imposed pursuant to section 2923.13 of the Revised Code." R.C. 2923.125(D)(4). Therefore, the sheriff was required to consider Runions's unsealed felony convictions in finding him not qualified for a CCL. Judgment affirmed.
What This Ruling Means
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.