in the Coeur D'Alene Courthouse (old building) in Courtroom 1 at 10:000 am on
Wednesday, September 19, 2012. This is open to the public and we hope to
see you there. The Idaho Supreme Court Press Release is stated below for
your information regarding this appeal.
Chuck Murray and Jeanne Holder
CITIZENS AGAINST RANGE
EXPANSION, JEANNE J. HOM, EUGENE
RILEY, KATHLEEN RILEY, LAMBERT
RILEY, DENISE RILEY, GABRIELLE
GROTH-MARNAT, GERALD PRICE,
RONALD ELDRIDGE, DOROTHY
ELDRIDGE, GLENN CHAPIN, LUCY
CHAPIN, SHERYL PUCKETT, CHARLES
MURRAY, CYNTHIA MURRAY, DAVIE
FISH AND GAME DEPARTMENT, VIRGIL
Docket No. 39297
Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of
Kootenai County. Hon. John T. Mitchell, District Judge.
Honorable Lawrence G. Wasden, Idaho Attorney General, Boise, for appellants.
Scott W. Reed, Coeur d'Alene, and Harvey Richman, Athol, for respondents
This appeal comes to the Idaho Supreme Court after protracted litigation
Farragut Shooting Range in Bayview. The Citizens Against Range Expansion
of individuals who reside near the range, sued the Idaho Department of Fish
and Game (IDFG) in
2005. Based on safety and noise concerns, CARE sought to enjoin IDFG's use
and expansion of
the range. The district court granted injunctive relief and closed the
range. It then set safety
requirements for reopening the range for up to 500 shooters per year, and
safety and noise
requirements for reopening it for more than 500 shooters. In 2010, after
making modifications to
the range, IDFG filed a Motion for Partial Lifting of Injunction.
Citizens Against Range Expansion v. Fish and Game Department, S.Ct. 39297
The district court denied the motion after determining that IDFG had not met
requirements for lifting the injunction for up to 500 shooters. The court
found that the terms of the
injunction order were not met because bullets could escape downrange via
ricochet. Further, the
district court determined that the Idaho Outdoor Sport Shooting Act, which
was enacted by the
Idaho Legislature in 2008, was an unconstitutional special law and violation
of judicial power.
Because the noise standards adopted by the Act were unconstitutional, the
court concluded that
IDFG had not yet complied with the noise requirements for lifting the
injunction for more than 500
shooters. IDFG appealed this decision to the Supreme Court.