Juzumas v. Nassau Cnty.

33 F.4th 681

Victor JUZUMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK, Defendant-Appellee,"John Does 1-5", Defendants.

No. 20-0086-cv

August Term 2020

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued: December 10, 2020

Decided: May 12, 2022

AMY L. BELLANTONI, The Bellantoni Law Firm, PLLC, Scarsdale, NY, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

JARED A. KASSCHAU, Nassau County Attorney, Mineola, NY (Robert F. Van der Waag, Deputy County Attorney, on the brief), for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: Pooler, Wesley, Carney, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:

Victor Juzumas sued Nassau County (the "County") and five "John Doe" law enforcement officers (the County and the individuals together, "Defendants") for alleged constitutional violations arising from their enforcement of New York Penal Law § 400.00(11)(c). Juzumas alleges that the County's policy interpreting § 400.00(11)(c) is broader than the law itself, and unconstitutional as it was applied to him. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Donnelly, J .) disagreed, finding that the County acted in large part to enforce a mandatory provision of state law and was not a proper defendant under Vives v. City of New York , 524 F.3d 346 (2d Cir. 2008). Juzumas v. Nassau Cty. , 417 F. Supp. 3d 178 (E.D.N.Y. 2019). It granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Juzumas's First, Second, and Fourth Amendment claims, related Monell claims, and Section 1983 conspiracy claim. We affirm the order of the district court in part, except to the extent that it failed to reach an adequate determination on the County's longarms possession policy. We vacate and remand in part for the district court to address that aspect of Juzumas's Second Amendment and Monell claims.

BACKGROUND

I. Statutory Framework

New York Penal Law creates a licensing regime for the possession of pistols, revolvers, and certain other handguns, which it refers to as "firearms." See N.Y. Penal Law § 265.00(3). This regime makes it unlawful in New York to possess a firearm without a license. See id. §§ et seq. 265.20(3), 400.00(2). Eligibility for a license is governed by Penal Law § 400.00(1), which provides that "[n]o license shall be issued or renewed except for an applicant" who meets several enumerated requirements. Among those requirements are that the applicant be "of good moral character," id. § 400.00(1)(b), and that there be "no good cause ... for the denial of the license," id. § 400.00(1)(n). Under the state law, licenses—colloquially referred to as either pistol, handgun, or firearm licenses—are generally issued and administered by local governmental units or officers. In Juzumas's case, Nassau County was charged with the licensing responsibility.

The State maintains no similar licensing scheme for long-barrel rifles and shotguns ("long guns" or "longarms").¹ However, the Penal Law speaks to continued long gun possession by a person whose pistol license has been revoked, as we describe below. Pistol license revocation may occur in several different circumstances. Among them is that described by Penal Law § 400.00(11)(a), which provides that a license holder's conviction of a "felony" or "serious offense," or the license holders "at any time becoming ineligible to obtain a license under this section," "shall operate as a revocation of the license." See also N.Y. Penal Law § 265.00(17) (defining "serious offense"). In addition, § 400.00(11)(b) requires licensing officers to suspend or revoke the license of any person about whom a report of mental disturbance has been made pursuant to New York Mental Hygiene Law § 9.46.

The tethering between longarm possession and pistol licenses occurs in subsection (c) of Penal Law § 400.00(11). Subsection (c) provides that in "any instance in which a person's license is suspended or revoked under paragraph (a) or (b) of this subdivision, such person shall surrender such license to the appropriate licensing official and any and all firearms, rifles, or shotguns owned or possessed by such person shall be surrendered to an appropriate law enforcement agency." N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(11)(c) (emphasis added).

Nassau County adopted a policy implementing this part of the state statutory framework. In May 2014, it published a legal bulletin declaring that "a person whose handgun license is suspended or revoked for any reason is not only required to surrender [his] license and handguns but also [his] rifles and shotguns to the licensing authority (Nassau County Police Department)." JA 268–73.² The written policy does not state whether an individual in Nassau County whose pistol license has been revoked and weapons have been surrendered may possess long guns again before being issued another pistol license. As Juzumas describes the County policy, however, that individual may lawfully possess long guns again only after he applies for, and the County issues him, another pistol license. See Juzumas , 417 F. Supp. 3d at 182.

II. Facts³

Juzumas, a customs broker and resident of Nassau County, applied for and received a pistol license from the County in January 2003. In May 2008, Juzumas was arrested for conspiring to import controlled substances. The arresting officer confiscated his pistol license and pistols. In September 2008, the County suspended Juzumas's pistol license based on the May arrest. Soon after his license suspension, law enforcement officers collected Juzumas's long guns, but returned the long guns to him a few weeks later. Almost four years later, in June 2012, Juzumas pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor conspiracy to defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, in connection with his 2008 arrest.

In November 2015, three years after his guilty plea and seven years after his initial license suspension, the County sent Juzumas a letter stating that his pistol license had been revoked. It identified three bases for the revocation: (1) "[a]rrest history," (2) "[c]onviction of violation title 18 USC 371 [sic]," and (3) "[l]ack of good moral character." Joint Appendix ("JA") at 58. It further advised that, as "directed by New York State Penal Law section 400, and the New York State Secure Ammunitions and Firearm Enforcement Act [SAFE Act], you are prohibited from possessing firearms, rifles, shotguns." Id. The County's letter informed Juzumas of several options for disposing of his weapons: "a transfer of ownership to a properly licensed individual as mandated by the NY Safe Act, sale to a New York State licensed gun dealer; or request the destruction of the firearm(s)." Id.

After receiving the letter, Juzumas made gifts of his long guns to his son-in-law, to a "hunting buddy," and to a friend. Special App'x 6. (In light of the 2008 pistol license suspension, he no longer possessed a pistol.) He then unsuccessfully attempted to appeal the pistol license revocation using County administrative processes. He represented to the district court that he had not tried to buy long guns since his license was revoked.

III. Procedural History

In May 2017, Juzumas sued Defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. He alleged that they violated his First, Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights by requiring the surrender of his long guns upon revocation of his pistol license, by conditioning his reacquisition of long guns upon the issuance to him of a new pistol license, and by denying his application for a new license on the ground that his misdemeanor conviction was a "serious offense" within the meaning of Penal Law § 265.00(17). Issue was joined and the parties cross-moved for summary judgment.⁴

The district court granted judgment to the County on Juzumas's Second Amendment claim, finding that the County did not infringe Juzumas's right to bear arms in any way not required by the state law, whose constitutionality Juzumas had not challenged. The district court reasoned that, through its policy requiring surrender of the license and longarms, the County was merely enforcing Penal Law § 400.00(11). The district court dismissed Juzumas's Fourth Amendment claim, finding no governmental seizure because Juzumas voluntarily "gave away" his long guns. Juzumas , 417 F. Supp. 3d at 187–88. It agreed with Juzumas, however, on his Fourteenth Amendment claim, concluding that he should have received a hearing before being required to permanently cede possession of his long guns.⁵

The district court granted summary judgment to the County on Juzumas's Monell claims arising from his Second and Fourth Amendment allegations. It briefly addressed Juzumas's claim that the County's open-ended prohibition on his possession of longarms contravened his Second Amendment rights by commenting that "[a]t oral argument, counsel for the County said that the County no longer uses the [revocation] letter that the plaintiff received, and that it is now clear that someone whose pistol license has been revoked, and surrenders longarms at the time of the revocation, is free after the confiscation of his longarms to go out and purchase other longarms." Juzumas , 417 F. Supp. 3d at 183 (internal footnote and quotations omitted). The court noted that, apart from the statement made at oral argument, "[t]he County did not explain how the plaintiff would have learned of the policy change, or the extent to which a background check, which would have alerted a gun dealer that the plaintiff's license had been revoked, would have been an impediment to purchasing a longarm." Id. It further observed that "[a]t oral argument, counsel for the County conceded that the plaintiff's continued possession of his longarms did not pose any danger to the community." Id. at 190.

Juzumas appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to the County on his Second and Fourth Amendment claims.

DISCUSSION⁶

I. Second Amendment Claims

Juzumas argues that Nassau County's policy regarding the surrender and reacquisition of long guns is homegrown and not merely an...