Court Opinion

ID: 9925316
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-19 15:03:23.587213+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:49.883201
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
                        SECOND DISTRICT

                           STATE OF FLORIDA,

                                Appellant,

                                    v.

                           JONATHAN VALLEY,

                                 Appellee.

                             No. 2D22-4133

                            January 19, 2024

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Lyann Goudie,
Judge.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Michael W. Mervine,
Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Laura Dempsey, Assistant
Attorney General (substituted as counsel of record), Tampa, for
Appellant.

E. Michael Isaak of Isaak Law, PLLC, Tampa, for Appellee.

KELLY, Judge.

     In June 2022, Jonathan Valley was arrested for carrying a
concealed firearm in violation of section 790.01(2), Florida Statutes
(2022). Valley filed a motion to dismiss arguing that under section
790.25(5), he was permitted to possess the concealed firearm because it
had been securely encased within a private conveyance. The trial court
agreed and dismissed the charge against Valley. The State appeals.
     Valley was pulled over by police officers for a traffic infraction.
When the officers approached the car, they observed a handgun in the
car's glove box and smelled the odor of burnt marijuana. They asked
Valley to get out of the car. Valley was wearing a crossbody pack over
his shoulder and chest that was zipped closed. When the officers
removed the pack and searched it, they discovered a loaded handgun.
They arrested Valley for carrying a concealed firearm.
     Section 790.01(2) makes it a crime to carry a concealed firearm on
or about the person. However, section 790.25(5)1 provides an exception
to section 790.01(2) and states, in pertinent part:
            Possession in private conveyance.--Notwithstanding
     subsection (2), it is lawful and is not a violation of s. 790.01
     for a person 18 years of age or older to possess a concealed
     firearm or other weapon for self-defense or other lawful
     purpose within the interior of a private conveyance, without a
     license, if the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or
     is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use.
     Nothing herein contained prohibits the carrying of a legal
     firearm other than a handgun anywhere in a private
     conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful
     use. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to
     authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm or other weapon
     on the person. This subsection shall be liberally construed in
     favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms
     and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided
     in s. 776.012.
     On appeal, the State argues that the trial court's dismissal was
error because it overlooked the sentence in section 790.25(5) that states

     1 Pursuant to a 2023 amendment, subsection (5) has been

renumbered subsection (4).

                                     2
that nothing in subsection (5) "shall be construed to authorize the
carrying of a concealed firearm . . . on the person." We agree that the
trial court erred.
      The trial court adopted Valley's argument that as long as the
firearm was securely encased, he could lawfully possess it anywhere in
the vehicle—even on his person—because the statute does not limit the
exception to constructive possession. This interpretation is inconsistent
with the plain language of section 790.25(5), which expressly limits the
right to possess a firearm in a vehicle to those that are either securely
encased or not otherwise available for immediate use and not carried on
the person. Further, it ignores the directive in subsection (5) that it
should not be construed in the manner suggested by Valley—that is to
allow possession on the person. See Doughty v. State, 979 So. 2d 1048,
1050 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) ("[P]ursuant to the unambiguous language of
section 790.25(5), even a securely encased weapon does not fall under
the private conveyance exception if it is carried 'on the person.' ");
Gemmill v. State, 657 So. 2d 900, 902 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) ("[S]ection
790.25 specifically provides that the securely encased exception does not
legalize the carrying of a concealed weapon on the person.").
Accordingly, we reverse the order dismissing the information and remand
for further proceedings.
      Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

SILBERMAN and SMITH, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.

                                      3