Florida Supreme Court rules 7-0 that Cops are covered under Stand Your Ground

Anything and Everything dealing with Political issues.
Post Reply
Miami_JBT
Posts: 960
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:17 pm
Location: Pensacola to Key West & In-Between
Contact:

Florida Supreme Court rules 7-0 that Cops are covered under Stand Your Ground

Post by Miami_JBT »

Image

The Supreme Court of Florida has ruled 7-0 that law enforcement officers who uses deadly force during a lawful arrest which he/she believes is reasonably necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself/herself or others, may invoke immunity from criminal prosecution under the Stand Your Ground law.

This stems from an incident on July 31, 2013; when Broward County Sheriff Deputy Peter Peraza shot and killed Jermaine McBean at an apartment pool complex. McBean appearing to be mentally distraught purchased an air rifle that day and was walking around the complex. Deputy Peraza responded to the scene and issued commands to McBean to put the weapon down. McBean didn't listen, pointed the air rifle at Deputy Peraza, and the rest is what you'd expect. The deputy was in fear for his life and fired, not knowing that it was simply an air rifle being pointed at him.

Deputy Peraza was charged with manslaughter and his defense attorney cited both criminal and civil immunity under Florida Statute 776.012(1), 776.032(1). The collection of laws that is commonly refereed to as "Stand Your Ground".

The State Attorney's Office appealed that Deputy Peraza was not eligible for SYG due to being covered by 776.05. The statute that gives law enforcement officers coverage when they use of force in making an arrest, but not immunity from prosecution. The State's appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court and stated;

Because these statutes plainly and unambiguously afford Stand Your Ground immunity to any “person” who acts in self-defense, there should be no reason for further analysis. See Holly, 450 So. 2d at 219. Put simply, a law enforcement officer is a “person” whether on duty or off, and irrespective of whether the officer is making an arrest. Although neither of the two statutes defines the word “person,” it must be given its “plain and ordinary meaning.” Green v. State, 604 So. 2d 471, 473 (Fla. 1992). In common understanding, “person” refers to a “human being,” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 1686 (1993 ed.), which is not occupation-specific and plainly includes human beings serving as law enforcement officers.

For the foregoing reasons, we resolve the certified conflict and answer the certified question by holding that law enforcement officers are eligible to assert Stand Your Ground immunity, even when the use of force occurred in the course of making a lawful arrest. Based upon the trial court’s findings of fact, Deputy Peraza is entitled to that immunity and is therefore immune from criminal prosecution.


What does this mean in the future for Florida Law Enforcement and the Law Abiding Public? My personal opinion is now that the courts have ruled that SYG applies to law enforcement. I see the Industrial Civilian Disarmament Complex dropped down a notch or two from getting general police support to repeal or the laws that make up SYG by declaring them unconstitutional.
My gun channel - New Wave Firearms
FL Director & National Spokeman for Gun Owners of America - Join GOA at discount
Communism - 20th Century Mass Murder Champions
User avatar
Skoll
Posts: 868
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 2:39 pm
Location: New Mexico, formerly WPB

Post by Skoll »

Yay for cops enjoying yet more protections the rest of us are not allowed. Next thing you know, that something like that asshat in Washington plainclothes pulling over that motorcyclist will happen, the cop will shoot the guy, and then get off scot free because all his buddies will back him up.
"The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted."
dammitgriff
Posts: 928
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:06 am

Post by dammitgriff »

OP—thank you for hot-linking the relevant statutes.
This FLSC ruling clearly opens up the possibility of a civilian shooting a law enforcement officer under the exact same justification cited above: when the tables are turned, a “police officer” is not a protected government agent, he is a “person”.
Mark my words, this issue is far from settled law. I predict it will come before SCOTUS when a civilian uses SYG to protect himself from an aggressive cop.
Article:
Yes, You Have the Right to Talk Back to the Government, But It Could Get You Killed
https://rutherford.org/publications_res ... you_killed
Allme
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:49 pm

Post by Allme »

dammitgriff wrote: Fri Dec 14, 2018 3:19 pm OP—thank you for hot-linking the relevant statutes.
This FLSC ruling clearly opens up the possibility of a civilian shooting a law enforcement officer under the exact same justification cited above: when the tables are turned, a “police officer” is not a protected government agent, he is a “person”.
Mark my words, this issue is far from settled law. I predict it will come before SCOTUS when a civilian uses SYG to protect himself from an aggressive cop.
Article:
Yes, You Have the Right to Talk Back to the Government, But It Could Get You Killed
https://rutherford.org/publications_res ... you_killed
This has already been ruled on in the case of the unlawful arrest. That being said however I agree with your last statement. Unless there are some very extenuating circumstances its better to fight it out in court, no matter how "right" a person is LE is a gang that has plenty of members that won't get the memo. They also have the mindset that a dead man can't go to court to testify against anyone.

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306.

https://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm
dammitgriff
Posts: 928
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:06 am

Post by dammitgriff »

Dead cops can’t testify either.
Now do you see what I mean?
This ruling is a fuse in the powder keg.
It’s what happens when some people are decreed more equal than others.
It won’t end well for citizens or the government.
Post Reply