Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the appellant contested the judgment and sentence arising from his nolo contendere plea to the charge of carrying a concealed firearm under section 790.01(2) of the Florida Statutes. The plea followed the trial court's denial of his motions to suppress and dismiss, with the right to appeal these denials preserved. The appellant's actions at an airport led to a search of his carry-on bag, revealing a loaded firearm, which was central to the court's determination of probable cause. The court emphasized that the question of whether the firearm was concealed 'on or about' the appellant's person was a factual determination for the trier of fact, guided by the precedent set in Ensor v. State. The appellant's reliance on the statutory exception in section 790.25(5), as interpreted in Alexander v. State, was dismissed as inapplicable to commercial flights, where firearms must not be readily accessible. The court affirmed the trial court’s decisions, reinforcing that section 790.25(5) applies to private conveyances and not to situations involving commercial airline travel. Judges Scheb and Threadgill concurred with the decision, upholding the appellant's conviction and sentence.
Legal Issues Addressed
Application of Section 790.01 and Exceptionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court ruled that the statutory exception in section 790.25(5) does not apply to carrying a concealed firearm on a commercial flight, as the firearm was deemed readily accessible.
Reasoning: Consequently, this exception does not apply to situations such as boarding a commercial airline flight.
Concealed Firearm on or about a Personsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that whether a firearm is concealed and 'on or about his person' must be determined by the trier of fact, referencing Ensor v. State.
Reasoning: Citing Ensor v. State, the court notes that the determination of concealment and proximity to the person must be evaluated by the trier of fact.
Legislative Intent of Firearm Accessibilitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court emphasized that section 790.25(5) was intended for securely encased firearms not readily accessible, distinguishing it from the appellant’s case.
Reasoning: The exception in section 790.25(5) is aimed at securely encased firearms that are not readily accessible, and it explicitly states that it does not permit carrying a concealed firearm on one’s person.
Nolo Contendere Plea and Right to Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant reserved the right to appeal the denials of his motions to suppress and dismiss after entering a nolo contendere plea.
Reasoning: He entered the plea after the denial of his motions to suppress and dismiss, specifically reserving the right to appeal these denials, which the State of Florida acknowledged as dispositive.
Probable Cause for Search and Seizuresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The presence of a suspicious object in a carry-on bag provided police officers with probable cause to search for a firearm.
Reasoning: The court affirms that police officers have probable cause to search a passenger’s baggage for a firearm under these circumstances.