Mederos v. State
102 So. 3d 7
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Mederos is charged with aggravated battery with a deadly weapon following a pregame dispute near FSU campus.
- Mederos sought immunity under Florida's Stand Your Ground Law, § 776.012, .013, .031-.032, arguing self-defense/defense of others/forcible felony protection.
- The trial court held an evidentiary hearing and denied the motion to dismiss, finding insufficient proof of immunity by a preponderance.
- Testimony conflicted about whether a strangulation-type attack occurred and whether Mederos acted to stop a forcible felony or in self-defense.
- The court found Mederos’ use of a knife after removing Ribas from danger did not constitute reasonable fear of great bodily harm.
- The denial of immunity is not a bar to raising Stand Your Ground as an affirmative defense at trial; appeal is via writ of prohibition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether immunity attaches under Stand Your Ground | Mederos asserts immunity applies to prevent prosecution. | State contends no immunity given the evidence of non-defensive conduct. | Immunity denied; not proven by competent substantial evidence at pretrial. |
| Proper vehicle to raise immunity | Pretrial motion to dismiss under Rule 3.190(b) is appropriate. | Immunity determination requires an evidentiary hearing and is dispositive if proven. | Pretrial dismissal is appropriate pathway; denial preserved for trial as an affirmative defense. |
| Standard of review for immunity ruling | Findings of fact must support immunity under substantial evidence. | Trial court’s factual determinations are reviewed for competent substantial evidence with de novo legal review. | Trial court’s factual findings must be supported by competent substantial evidence; legal conclusions reviewed de novo. |
| Consequences of denial on future proceedings | Denied immunity should foreclose prosecution absent trial justification. | denial is not a bar; Stand Your Ground defense may be presented at trial. | Denial is without prejudice to raising Stand Your Ground at trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dennis v. State, 51 So.3d 456 (Fla.2010) (Stand Your Ground immunity interpreted; section 776.032 contemplates nontrial disposition)
- Peterson v. State, 983 So.2d 27 (Fla.1st DCA 2008) (approved in Dennis; pretrial hearing for immunity)
- Hair v. State, 17 So.3d 804 (Fla.1st DCA 2009) (standard of review for immunity orders; pretrial review parity)
- Darling v. State, 81 So.3d 574 (Fla.3d DCA 2012) (competent substantial evidence standard in immunity context)