October 23, 2014

Elyria
Sunny
55°F
test

Court orders Oberlin to return seized guns to Lorain man

ELYRIA — The 9th District Court of Appeals has ruled that the city of Oberlin should return firearms confiscated from a Lorain man whose guns were seized following his arrest on a domestic violence charge in 2010.

Joseph Wysocki, who later pleaded no contest to a lesser charge of criminal mischief involving a family member, sued the city in 2012, arguing that the city had improperly refused to return the two weapons.

Prosecutors objected to the return of the firearms on the grounds that Wysocki had been convicted of a crime of domestic violence and would be barred under the law from owning guns. Lorain County Common Pleas Judge Raymond Ewers later agreed with prosecutors and refused to order the return of the guns.

But the appeals court wrote in a decision released Monday that there was nothing in the law preventing Wysocki from owning guns.

The third-degree misdemeanor criminal mischief charge he pleaded no contest to involved property, not violence against a person, which is a first-degree misdemeanor, the appeals court wrote.

“This Court concludes that, given the fact that he was convicted of a third-degree misdemeanor, his conviction did not involve the risk of physical harm to his victim,” the decision said. “This Court further notes that criminal mischief is not listed as an ‘offense of violence’ as defined by (the Ohio) Revised Code.”

The appeals court did not weigh in on a request Wysocki had made for legal fees and monetary damages.

Contact Brad Dicken at 329-7147 or bdicken@chroniclet.com. Follow him on Twitter @BradDickenCT.


  • Bob

    Wait WHAT???

    He was arrested for D.V. plead to a lesser charge(i.e. Plea Deal) and he is getting his guns back because he plead to criminal mischief.

    What kind of crap is that. He shouldn’t get his guns back because of what he was arrest for, not because of what he was convicted of. This is about the dumbest thing I have read on here in a long time.

    • Peter Gozina

      You my friend are an idiot. The law states that those convicted of a felony or crime of violence may not own or possess a weapon. Read the article it’s actually well written, he was convicted of a misdemenor non-violent crime. Sometime “plea deal” sometimes means that the evidence may not support a conviction. The prosecutor on the case is often times in a different position than the officers who are on scene in sometimes tense situations. The man bought those guns they are his and there is nothing in the law that says he can not have them. Please BOB never buy a gun although it’s a simple device you might not be able to figure out how to use it.

      • Bob

        I am a veteran of the first Gulf War. So I have been trained to properly use all types guns.

        I am sure you probably has never left your parent’s basement. Knowing people like you, you lack the spine to even think about going into the military.

        Why do you think it took so long for him to get his guns back. Why, because others thought the same way I did. He was convicted for criminal mischief. BUT!!! he still committed the crime and was Charged with D.V.. That is why it is stupid for him to get his guns back. He is getting them back on a technicality.

        • Starryeyes63

          Where were you in 90-91 I was in Jeddah & Bahrain..

    • tickmeoff

      Gees Bob, an accusation is not a conviction. You should have learned this when you were 10 years old! Bob, this may be hard for you to comprehend, but as a man, you are a natural target for domestic violence.
      When the police come Bob, who is getting charged with domestic violence? I put my money on the male!

      • Bob

        Why do you think it took so long for him to get his guns back. Why, because others thought the same way I did. He was convicted for criminal mischief. BUT!!! he still committed the crime and was Charged with D.V.. That is why it is stupid for him to get his guns back. He is getting them back on a technicality.

        There was no accusation. He was CHARGED with D.V. Read the story again.

        • Peter Gozina

          Left my parents basement long enough to get a law degree, and the technicality you refer to is the constitution you fought to protect. I have to assume your comments are ignorance guided by an agenda. Or the thought that you are the only one qualified to carry a gun.

          • Bob

            Oh so you are one of those scumbag lawyers that get all these criminals off for the violent crimes they commit. Your parents must be so proud.

            Everyone has a right to bear arms. Which apparently is you agenda.

            All I am saying is he should not BASED on what he was arrested for, get his guns back. But he has every right to them, because some scumbag lawyer asked the judge to let this man plea to a lesser charge.

            He has every right to his guns. BUT WHY THE F**K were they taken away in the first place???? That what you have to ask yourself.

          • Peter Gozina

            Thank you for every reply you truly show the misled type of thinking that unfortunately plagues this country. Accused are innocent until proven guilty, but you are clearly the smartest person you know insofar as you can clearly determine guilt or innocence in the absence of what others call due process. I can rest easy with you at the helm, all rights will be protected under your watch just so long as no one accuses another of a crime. Please reply and show me how stupid I and our founding fathers are to insist upon constitutional protections when dealing what have long been considered fundamental rights.

          • Joe Smith

            The guns were taken in the first place because the police will take any opportunity to disarm a citizen and it is SOP for a domestic violence charge, it does not make him automatically guilty.

            And to be clear, I am not saying he is innocent as I don’t know, but being charged with something and being guilty are two different things.

    • Joe Smith

      You might want to get the facts first, you can get charged with DV in some states for just yelling at your spouse, guns should never be taken from someone unless actual reasonably serious physical violence was used and you were convicted of it.

      Not a simple shove etc., but a violent act

      I am not saying there was not such violence in this case, but nothing in the article states that and a prosecutor will not usually plead down a charge unless he has a fair chance of losing etc. prosecutors also routinely over charge for crimes in hope of getting a plea which would be down to the level of the actual crime.

      And your comment “He shouldn’t get his guns back because of what he was arrest for, not because of what he was convicted of” is just ridicules, people are falsely charged with crimes all the time, you are suppose to be innocent until PROVEN guilty.

      • Bob

        Chances are we will see this guys name again. And I will bet you it will be for a gun related crime.

        • Joe Smith

          How much do you want to bet?

          How about $100 with a one year time limit?

  • brenda

    Wow! That’s crazy! Now when he messes around and shoots someone, what’s he going to be charged with and what’s he going to plead to so he can keep his guns! He should have been convicted of what he was charged with in the first place!!

    • Joe Smith

      How do you know he was guilty of what he was charged with in the first place?