State v. Wonder
128 So. 3d 867
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Two petitions were consolidated for record and disposition and then sua sponte consolidated for this opinion, involving a deadly post office parking lot shooting.
- In Case No. 4D12-4559, defendant sought prohibition to overturn an order denying dismissal under Stand Your Ground immunity (ss 776.032, 776.012, Fla. Stat. 2009).
- In Case No. 4D12-1510, State sought certiorari to challenge the court’s finding that the victim’s conduct did not constitute unlawful activity under 776.013(3).
- The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and found the defendant’s use of deadly force not reasonably necessary, denying dismissal.
- The court also held that possession of a firearm on post office property did not constitute unlawful activity, prompting the petitions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether immunity under Stand Your Ground was properly denied | Defendant argues immunity applies under 776.012; denial was error. | State contends no immunity as force was not reasonably necessary. | Denied; trial court’s factual findings supported no reasonable belief in necessity. |
| Whether possession of a firearm on post office property constitutes unlawful activity under 776.013(3) | Defendant contends this issue was unnecessary given 776.012 relied upon. | State argues possession on premises can trigger 776.013(3) presumption defenses. | Remanded; court need not have addressed 776.013(3); issue unnecessary. |
| Appropriate interpretation of 776.012 and 776.013 interplay and applicability of Stand Your Ground outside the 'castle' | Defendant asserts 776.013(3) provides outside-castle protection; no conflict with 776.012. | State contends the statutes create compatible immunity forms with overlapping reach. | We agree 776.013(3) complements but does not preclude 776.012; analysis aligns with Little/Bragdon framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- Joseph v. State, 103 So.3d 227 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (prohibition review of immunity rulings; defer to factual findings)
- Little v. State, 111 So.3d 214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (outside-castle deadly force with presumption framework under 776.013)
- Bragdon v. State, 123 So.3d 654 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (possession of firearm by felon constitutes unlawful activity for immunity purposes)
- Wonder v. State, 64 So.3d 1208 (Fla. 2011) (quashed earlier decision upholding denial of evidentiary hearing)