Curris v. StateCurris v. State
Peter Richard Curris seeks certiorari review of a circuit court decision affirming his misdemeanor conviction for carrying a concealed weapon. We deny the petition under the standard announced in Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93 (Fla. 1983).
A deputy sheriff arrested Mr. Curris on June 27, 1993, for carrying a concealed weapon. Thе deputy filed an arrest report stating that Mr. Curris had allegedly threatened people at а food store with a knife. When the deputy searched Mr. Curris‘s right front pants pocket, he found a buck knifе with a 4-inch blade in an open and locked position.
The state charged Mr. Curris with the misdemeanor offenses of carrying a concealed weapon and improper exhibition of а dangerous weapon. Mr. Curris moved to dismiss the first charge on the ground that
Mr. Curris‘s petition to this court faces several difficult obstacles. First, although Mr. Curris entered his plea purporting to reserve this issue for appeal, the county court never expressly ruled that the issue was dispositive. See State v. Carr, 438 So.2d 826 (Fla. 1983). Such a ruling may be implicit in this case, but the technical requiremеnts for appellate jurisdiction in the circuit court do not exist in this record.
Second, Mr. Curris‘s motion to dismiss the charges is unsworn. See
Finally, we note this court has hеld that a 4-inch buck knife may be a concealed weapon. State v. Ortiz, 504 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). At least implicitly, we have treated this statute as facially constitutional. The defendant forcefully argues that whether a specific knife under undisputed facts is or is not a “weapon” should not be determined by the whim of a jury. Cf. State v. Tremblay, 642 So.2d 64 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (аbsent evidence that common household item was used in threatening manner, trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing carrying concealed weapon charge against defendant where stаte only presented evidence that officers found ice pick under front armrest in defendant‘s car). Other jurisdictions have reached varying results concerning similar statutes.3 The statute would be more precise if a “common pocketknife” were defined, for example, to except only closed pocket knives with a blade-length no greater than 3 inches. Absent a judiciаl determination of vagueness or overbreadth, however, such precision in definition is within the province of the legislature.
Petition for certiorari denied.
HALL, A.C.J., and BLUE, J., concur.
Notes
(1) Whoever shall carry a concealed weapon or electric weapon or device on or about his person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in
(2) Whoever shall carry a concealed firearm on or about his person shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in
(3) Nothing in this section shall relate to persons licensed as set forth in
(Footnote omitted.)
“Weapon” means any dirk, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon except a firearm or a common pocketknife.