Jovan Casanova, Petitioner, vs. The State of Florida, Respondent.
No. 3D21-2019
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
October 27, 2021
Lower Tribunal No. M21-3889
Opinion filed October 27, 2021.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
A Writ of Certiorari to the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Christine Bandin, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Deborah Prager, Assistant Public Defender, for petitioner.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Before HENDON, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.
Jovan Casanova petitions this Court for writ of certiorari seeking to quash the lower tribunal‘s order denying his motion to dismiss pursuant to
Casanova was charged with one count of misdemeanor battery. Casanova filed an unsworn pretrial motion to dismiss pursuant to
Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order denying Casanova‘s motion to dismiss concluding that Casanova “cannot establish a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity unless and until his Motion is either: i) sworn to by a person with personal knowledge of the facts alleged therein; or ii) supported by evidence or testimony that establishes the facts set forth in the motion.” As such, the lower tribunal did not address Casanova‘s motion to dismiss on the merits.
In a criminal prosecution, once a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution has been raised by the defendant at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence is on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution provided in subsection (1).
Based on the Second District Court of Appeal‘s decision in Jefferson v. State, 264 So. 3d 1019 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018), contrary to the lower tribunal‘s order, we conclude that a defendant‘s motion to dismiss under Florida‘s Stand Your Ground law can establish a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution even though the motion to dismiss is not sworn to by someone with personal knowledge or supported by evidence or testimony establishing the facts in the motion to dismiss. Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the order under review, and remand with instructions for the lower tribunal to evaluate Casanova‘s motion to dismiss on the merits.
