Norman v. Florida

Norman v. Florida is the case of a law abiding concealed carry licensee who was arrested and prosecuted in Fort Pierce, FL for violating Florida nearly complete ban on Open Carry after his otherwise lawfully carried handgun unknowingly became unconcealed while walking down the street the first time he carried outside his home with his new Florida concealed carry license.

Dash Cam Video of Arrest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qKeJ6jd2Ak

A St. Lucie County Judge denied all constitutional arguments to dismiss the case against Dale Norman. While the court made findings that the statute is overbroad and is facially vague, the court still issued a conviction on an “as applied” standard.

The County Court judge also did not fully consider the Second Amendment or the Right to Bear Arms under the Florida Constitution; denying those motions to dismiss the case because the question of the right to bear arms "is for someone above the level of this court."

The Second Amendment question is fairly straightforward; Florida courts have clearly found that the carrying of a concealed firearm is a privilege, subject even to being banned completely, not a right protected by the constitution. Florida appellate courts have held that the “Retroactive application of (new Florida Statutes), is not unconstitutional because a license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm is a privilege and not a vested right.” Crane v. Department of State, 547 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 1989).

The Florida Legislature and Supreme Court have long recognized that there is a right to bear arms outside of the home. The “privilege of a license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm” recognized in Crane cannot replace, or substitute for, the fundamental right guaranteed by the U.S. and Florida Constitutions.

The County Court did, however, certify the constitutional questions directly to the 4th District Court of Appeals as questions of great public importance.

The DCA accepted jurisdiction and upheld the lower court's decision on the basis of deference to the Legislative Branch on Gun Control.

The case was appealed to the Florida Supreme Court where the court upheld the decision of the 4th District Court of Appeals by singling out the Right to Bear Arms protected by Art. I Sec. 8 of the Florida Constitution for special—and specially unfavorable—treatment subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Declaration of Rights guarantees.

Norman v. Florida has now been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Second Amendment grounds (see below).

Florida Carry is providing for the continued defense of Dale Norman and seeks to clarify what the right to bear arms is in Florida. Please help us win this fight for your RIGHT to Bear Arms by joining Florida Carry.

Updates

Appeal to Florida 4th District Court of Appeal, Case 4D12-3525

Norman v. State, 159 So. 3d 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)

2/18/2015 - The 4th DCA ruled against Dale Norman:

"While the right to carry outside the home has been established by the highest court of the land, no decision interpreting the Second Amendment can be cited for the proposition that a state must allow for one form of carry over another. Because the Legislature has the right to enact laws regarding the manner in which arms can be borne, it is likewise permitted to forbid the carrying of arms in a particular place or manner which, in its collective judgment, is likely to lead to breaches of the peace, see Carlton v. State, 58 So. 486, 488-89 (Fla. 1912), provided a reasonable alternative manner of carry is provided."

Motion for Rehearing in the 4th DCA was denied.

The case was appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, Case number SC15-650.

Norman v. State, 215 So. 3d 18 (Fla. 2017)

3/2/2017 - FSC-OPINION:

"We hold that section 790.053 does not unconstitutionally infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms, as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court in Heller and McDonald, or the Florida Constitution's freestanding right to bear arms subject to the Legislature's authority to regulate the use and manner of doing so. Because section 790.053 regulates only one manner of bearing arms and does not impair the exercise of the fundamental right to bear arms, we approve the Fourth District's well-reasoned decision in Norman upholding the constitutionality of section 790.053 under intermediate scrutiny. It is so ordered."

Petition for Cert. filed with US Supreme Court - 7/10/2017. Case Number: 17-68

If you are unfamiliar with U.S. Supreme Court procedures, SCOTUSblog.com is an outstanding reference.

7/10/2017 Petition for writ of certiorari

"Florida law provides for licenses to carry handguns concealed, but prohibits carrying firearms openly. Petitioner, who had such license, was convicted of openly carrying a firearm on a public street. The majority of the Florida Supreme Court upheld the ban under intermediate scrutiny based on conjecture by counsel about why the legislature may have banned open carry.

The issue is whether a prohibition on peaceably and openly carrying a lawfully-owned handgun infringes on “the right of the people to . . . bear arms” protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. That issue also involves the extent to which a restriction on a constitutional right may be upheld, under a proper standard of review, on the basis of a post hoc argument of counsel with no foundation in the legislative or factual record."

Case History

Docket Overview: Lower Court Case Number: 2012-MM-000530-A

St. Lucie County Clerk of the County Court

Lower Court Filings:

06/08/2012 Motion to Dismiss - OC Ban Unconstitutionally Vague

06/08/2012 Motion to Dismiss - OC Ban Violates Second Amendment and Art. 1 Sec. 8 FL Constitution

06/08/2012 Motion to Dismiss - OB Ban Unconstitutionally Proscribes Action without Mens Rea

08/14/2012 Lower Court's Written Judgment and Sentence - Written Judgment and Sentence of 6/10/2014 nunc pro tunc to 8/14/2012

08/22/2012 Lower Court's Written Order on Motions to Dismiss - Certified constitutional questions directly to the Florida 4th District Court of Appeals as matters of great public importance.

08/29/2012 Notice of Appeal

06/18/2014 Motion to Correct Judgment and Sentence issued 6/10/2014 nunc pro tunc to 8/14/2012

Docket Overview: Appellate Court Case Number: 4D12-3525

Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal Docket

Appellate Court Filings on Jurisdiction:

Date Docketed Description Date Due Filed By Notes 09/27/2012 Notice of Appeal Filed Ashley Minton , Appellant 09/27/2012 Determination of Indigent Status 10/05/2012 Order for brief memorandum on 9.160 case 10/15/2012 **VACATED 12/04/12** 10/15/2012 Notice of Appearance Eric J. Friday 797901, Appellant 10/15/2012 Memorandum Brief Eric J. Friday 797901, Appellant 10/22/2012 Motion To Compel Attorney General-W.P.B. AG01, Appellee (M) PRODUCTION OF AN APPENDIX 10/22/2012 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response Attorney General-W.P.B. AG01, Appellee (M) TO MEMORANDUM BRIEF 11/07/2012 State's First Motion To Dismiss Attorney General-W.P.B. AG01, Appellee 12/04/2012 ORD-Vacated 10/05/2012 ORDER 12/04/2012 Order to Show Cause-Appeal Dismissal 12/14/2012 10 DAYS 12/17/2012 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Eric J. Friday 797901, Appellant 01/08/2013 ORD-Denying Aplee's Motion to Dismiss 01/08/2013 ORD-Moot (APPELLEE'S 10/22/12 MOTION TO COMPEL, ETC.) 01/10/2013 State's Motion for Clarification Attorney General-W.P.B. AG01, Appellee OF 12/4/12 AND 1/8/13 ORDERS 01/24/2013 Miscellaneous Entry COPY OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION AND APPENDIX FILED IN SUPREME COURT. AE Attorney General-W.P.B. AG01 01/29/2013 ORD-Granting Clarification THIS COURT HAS ACCEPTED JURISDICTION IN THIS CASE, AND APPELLEE HAS NO FURTHER OBLIGATION TO ADDRESS THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE. 01/31/2013 Court Reporter Acknowledgment Letter 02/19/2013 Ack. Receipt from Supreme Court SC13-212 04/22/2013 Supreme Court Disposition SC13-212 DENIED

Docket Overview: Florida Supreme Court Case Number: SC13-212

Florida Supreme Court Docket

Supreme Court Filings on Jurisdiction:

Date Docketed Description Date Due Filed By Notes 01/30/2013 State's Petition for Writ of Prohibition State Of Florida STATE BY: PT Cynthia Laine Comras 151319 Attorney General - W.P.B. 02/07/2013 Motion to Strike or Dismiss Petition for Writ of Prohibition Dale Lee Norman BY: RS Eric J. Friday 797901 04/19/2013 Final Disposition - Writ Denied The petition for writ of prohibition is hereby denied because petitioner has failed to demonstrate that a lower court is attempting to act in excess of its jurisdiction. See Mandico v. Taos Constr., Inc., 605 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 1992); English v. McCrary, 348 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 1977). Any motions or other requests for relief are hereby denied.

Docket Overview: Appellate Court Case Number: 4D12-3525

Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal Docket

Appellate Court Filings on Merits:

Docket Overview: Florida Supreme Court Case Number: SC15-650

Florida Supreme Court Docket

Notable FL Supreme Court Filings:

Docket Overview: United States Supreme Court Case Number: 17-68

United States Supreme Court Docket

(Docketed 07/13/2017)

Notable US Supreme Court Filings: