Immigrant pleaded not guilty to possessing a gun while being in the U.S. illegally
A grand jury indicted Heber Tzoy-Tzoy on June 24, the same day he appeared in person for a preliminary hearing in federal court in downtown Milwaukee.
Tzoy was initially arrested by Milwaukee Police in September 2024 for driving under the influence and possession of a handgun.
The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms took the case on in December and arrested Tzoy at his apartment on South 22nd Street on June 10.
He has been in the custody of the Kenosha County Sheriff's Department. Magistrate Judge William Duffin did not approve bail for Tzoy at his first federal court hearing on June 11.
If convicted, Tzoy faces a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison and a $25,000 fine.
In a somewhat similar case in Illinois, U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Coleman dropped a charge of possession of a firearm while illegally in the U.S., calling it "unconstitutional."
Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, an immigrant who was unlawfully in the U.S., possessed a handgun back in 2020. The judge found that the "non-violent circumstances of his arrest" shouldn't deprive him of his Second Amendment right, according to her opinion.
Her ruling was appealed and sent to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in December.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Immigrant arrested near Domes in Milwaukee indicted on gun charge
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
6 hours ago
- The Hill
Silence kills: Now is the time to speak up against deadly gun silencers
In 2019, a gunman shot and killed 12 people in a Virginia Beach municipal building. His semiautomatic weapon was fitted with a silencer, making the gunshots sound, to one survivor, 'like a nail gun.' If the shots had been louder — if the people inside had been given even 30 more seconds of warning — lives could have perhaps been saved. But muffled sounds from the silencer created confusion and, ultimately, death. Silencers are dangerous. Now, they're more accessible than ever. Within President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act was a little-noticed but dangerous provision eliminating the $200 federal tax requirement on firearm silencers. Sold as a win for freedom and self-defense, this repeal does nothing to make ordinary Americans safer. Instead, it makes it easier to acquire deadly tools that muffle the sound of gunfire, and can make shootings harder to detect and survive. On July 4, Trump signed the so-called 'big beautiful bill,' a 1,200-page piece of legislation that overhauled taxes, took down social programs, and included a long list of far-right priorities. Buried within it was a provision that eliminated the federal tax on gun silencers, and stripped away regulations under the National Firearms Act. For nearly a century, silencers, also called suppressors, were subject to a $200 tax and required a federal registration process with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The goal wasn't to ban them outright, but to treat them with caution and scrutiny. By removing the tax, the bill treats them like ordinary firearm accessories. With the federal tax removed, the financial and procedural barriers that once slowed down silencer purchases are gone, making it easier and potentially faster to obtain them. In effect, this policy turns silencers into impulse buys available with minimal oversight, even in states with already loose gun laws. Supporters of the provision framed it as an effort to cut red tape, and to fully express Second Amendment freedoms. But in reality, it was a quiet win for the gun lobby — one that came at the cost of long-standing public safety protections. Silencers don't make guns completely silent, but they do make shootings harder to hear. That extra delay of seconds of confusion, lost sound or disbelief can cost lives. Proponents of silencer deregulation argue that suppressors reduce hearing damage for recreational shooters and make gun ranges less disruptive to neighbors. They frame the tax and registration process as bureaucratic overreach that burdens lawful gun owners. But these talking points ignore the ultimate threat to public safety that silencers carry: people have, and will continue to, die because of easy access to silencers. Further, with the removal of federal tax on silencers, the gun lobby is better equipped to argue in court against any and all government regulation of silencers. Even if silencers have some legitimate uses, removing the federal tax and treating them like common firearm accessories opens the door to widespread abuse. Responsible gun owners can still protect their hearing with earmuffs. Communities can't protect themselves from gunfire they never hear coming. This repeal didn't happen by accident. It slipped through quietly, buried in a massive bill, with little debate and even less public awareness. But that doesn't mean the story ends here. What happens when silencers become easier to buy than ever before? What role can we play in making sure our communities stay safe, and our voices stay heard? Maybe it starts with a message to a senator, a petition, or a post. Maybe it's showing up at a town hall, or supporting groups already doing the work: groups like Brady United Against Gun Violence, Everytown, Moms Demand Action, Giffords, and Sandy Hook Promise. We don't all have the same tools. But we all have a voice. And in the face of policies that turn down the volume on violence, maybe the most powerful thing we can do is refuse to stay quiet. If our leaders won't raise the alarm, we have to. Because the more we let silence spread, the more dangerous this country becomes. It's time to make some noise and address this hidden upheaval of public safety.
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
It's been 10 years since the 'Milwaukee lion' mystery. Social media says there was a big cat sighting this week
"Don't tell me there's another lion running around." That's what Karen Sparapani, executive director of the Milwaukee Area Domestic Animal Control Commission, had to say when informed that a user on the Nextdoor app reported seeing a big cat at Milwaukee's Riverside Park on July 25. Sparapani worked for MADACC when reports of a lion in Milwaukee in 2015, 10 years to the week, prompted a feline-hunt with officials using long guns, setting meat traps, and even utilizing a helicopter after former Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn said he reviewed cellphone video of a "lion-ish creature" in the city. Numerous callers reported seeing the creature. Every time, police would respond, investigate and turn up nothing, until a Milwaukee police officer said he spotted a "lion-like animal" near North 30th Street and West Fairmount Avenue. Authorities believed they had the big cat cornered on the city's north side and in came the TV cameras, national media outlets and photographers. Of course, the lion slipped away and forever lives in our thoughts. The first report of the "Milwaukee lion" came on July 20, 2015, when a woman said she saw the big cat in the 200 block of East Garfield Avenue, in Brewer's Hill. Others reported sightings near Washington Park. Former Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett joked at the time maybe the lion wanted to return to the location of the city's first zoo at Washington Park. The Milwaukee County Zoo maintained that no lions had escaped. The search took a sinister turn when a stray pit bull was shot by a man who believed the dog was the lion, officials said. That dog survived the shooting and was eventually adopted by MADACC staff. "It's very dangerous to think you're a big game hunter in the city of Milwaukee," Sparapani said. "Go back in your house or stay in your car and call the police." Nowadays, some people turn to social media before authorities. On July 25, a user of reported a "big cat" at Riverside Park, on Milwaukee's east side. "Potential big cat sighting," the post said. "Ran off before i could really get a good look at it. Tawny colored relatively long tail compared to its body. It was about 2.5 feet in height at the shoulder. It definitely wasn't a dog of any sort." The Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office, which handles public safety of county parks, hasn't responded to a request for comment. Sparapani said MADACC hasn't received any calls of a big cat in Milwaukee, but cougar sightings have happened in the area and will likely continue to grow. In 2018, a cougar was spotted peering through the front window of a Brookfield home. Reports of sightings of a lion – or "lion-like creature" – in Milwaukee aren't new. Big cat sightings were also front-page news in The Milwaukee Journal in 1961 following sightings in Mequon and Fox Point. The Department of Natural Resources said 37 cougars sightings were reported across the state in 2024. DNR officials have said cougars are sometimes confused with other animals, including house cats, fishers, bobcats, dogs, red foxes, coyotes and wolves. The cougar, also known as a puma, mountain lion or panther, used to roam Wisconsin. Not as prevalent in the state now, they sometimes travel to the state in search of a new mate or new territory and quickly keep traveling out of urban areas after not finding a suitable situation. The DNR said bobcats are the only big cat known to breed in Wisconsin. A bobcat was spotted in Whitefish Bay along Lake Michigan in 2018 and ended up traveling to Illinois. "I mean, these animals do exist in the wild," Sparapani said. "They travel down rivers and train tracks and that's how they get here." Wild animals, like big cats, bears and wolves, will continue to be spotted, Sparapani said. In 2022, a black bear was spotted in Franklin and in 2005, a bear that had been frequenting backyards and a commercial area in Wauwatosa was tranquilized and relocated. Sparapani added exotic animals will continue to get loose from owners who possess them illegally. Big cats continue to travel through urban areas "These things are going to keep happening," Sparapani said because wild animals lose natural space to humans throughout time. For instance, if more national forests get cut down, then that will affect where wild animals go, she said. "Believe me, they won't like it down here, they have to keep going right through," Sparapani said. "But it's also happening all over the country," she added, pointing to Rochester, New York, earlier this month, where a large animal was spotted on Ring doorbell camera, prompting a shelter-in-place order. Some wild animals pose a threat to humans, some don't for the most part, but nearly all are a threat to a human's pet. "Don't leave your pet outside alone," Sparapani said. Sparapani said too many times have occurred where owners have left their pet in the yard, even within a fenced in area or with a leash, only to return and see that a wild animal took their pet. 'Milwaukee lion' remains a mystery Although nothing ever came of the "Milwaukee lion" in 2015, Sparapani said she still remembers needing to leave the annual Brady Street Festival after receiving a call to go help police capture the big cat on the city's north side. She said there's a few possible reasons the lion was never captured. It could have been a lost large dog all along, or it could have been a pet big cat, or it was a wild animal that quickly left the area. "One theory is someone bought a mountain lion, because you can buy a mountain lion," Sparapani said. "They're not as common as bobcats, but you can buy them, and the animal escaped. And then whoever owned it was able to track it down ... because they'll find their way home. They know where they're fed. They want to get back to resources." Sparapani said there was never an increase in domestic pets being injured or killed by a wild animal throughout that summer. "So it wasn't preying on people's pets," she said. But the sighting of a cougar in Brookfield, a Milwaukee area suburb, in 2018, could be a sign that maybe the "Milwaukee lion" was not just an urban tale, Sparapani said. "It hard to say, but anything is possible," she said. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: It's been 10 years since the 'Milwaukee lion' mystery Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Newsom Responds to U.S. Court Blocking Ammo Background Check Law: ‘A Slap in the Face'
Newsom Responds to U.S. Court Blocking Ammo Background Check Law: 'A Slap in the Face' originally appeared on L.A. Mag. A state law meant to tackle rampant gun violence in California has been reversed following a decision made by the Appeals Court yesterday, which ruled the law a violation of the Second Newsom issued a statement following the new ruling, saying: 'Strong gun laws save lives — and [yesterday's] decision is a slap in the face to the progress California has made in recent years to keep its communities safer from gun violence. Californians voted to require background checks on ammunition and their voices should matter.'The former law, although passed by voters in 2016, has been in limbo for about seven years through state and federal courts. The fight to appear on the state ballot began in 2015, after the mass shooting in San Bernardino, which killed 14 people at a holiday party. Newsom headed the ballot initiative, in his then role as lieutenant governor, saying it was an answer to minimizing gun violence in California. Newsom secured the votes, mandating a background check for all ammunition purchases, similar to the background check needed to purchase a handgun. This would flag any attempted consumer with a criminal record, any prior restraining order or dangerous mental in January 2024, a district court ruled the law unconstitutional — after previous halting and reinstating — forcing the state of California to appeal. The Ninth Circuit panel struck down the law yesterday, in a 2-1 decision. 'By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases, California's ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms,' Judge Sandra S. Ikuta wrote in a statement for the two-judge majority decision, obtained by The New York background checks do receive overwhelming bipartisan support, typically ranging from 85 to 90 percent, according to the press announcement from Newsom's office. The report even cited a 2023 poll from Fox News, whom Newsom is actively suing for defamation, showing 87 percent of Americans supporting criminal background checks for anyone purchasing a firearm. The voters approved the law in 2016 with a 63 to 36 percent margin. This story was originally reported by L.A. Mag on Jul 25, 2025, where it first appeared. Solve the daily Crossword
