From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Amaya v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jun 7, 1991
580 So. 2d 885 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Summary

In Amaya, the firearm was concealed under the passenger's seat and its clips and bullets were lying separately in open view on the passenger's seat.

Summary of this case from Ridley v. State

Opinion

No. 90-01163.

June 7, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Sarasota County, Andrew D. Owens, Jr., J.

Ben Kay of Ben Kay, P.A., Sarasota, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corces, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.


We reverse the trial court's denial of defendant's motion to dismiss and defendant's sentence of probation in this prosecution for carrying a concealed weapon in violation of section 790.01(2), Florida Statutes (1987).

Defendant contends that the conduct with which he was charged falls within the exception created by section 790.25(5) that "it is lawful . . . to possess a concealed firearm . . . within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm . . . is . . . not readily accessible for immediate use." He argues that because, while the firearm was concealed under the passenger seat, its clip and bullets were lying separately in open view upon the seat, the firearm was not "readily accessible for immediate use."

We must agree with that contention. We cannot agree with the state's argument that the statutory exception was not applicable because a firearm need not be operable in order to be accessible for immediate use, e.g., for use in pointing it at someone in a threatening manner. Section 790.25(5), we conclude, contemplates an operable firearm. In reaching this conclusion we are persuaded by that section's additional language that "[t]his subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of . . . lawful use. . . ." We also cannot agree with the state's argument that the statutory exception was not applicable because the firearm could have been loaded and become operable. That exception requires that the firearm be "readily accessible for immediate use." (Emphasis added.)

Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment of acquittal.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and LEHAN and HALL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Amaya v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jun 7, 1991
580 So. 2d 885 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

In Amaya, the firearm was concealed under the passenger's seat and its clips and bullets were lying separately in open view on the passenger's seat.

Summary of this case from Ridley v. State

In Amaya, the Second District Court held that an unloaded firearm was not "readily accessible for immediate use" for purposes of the statute although ammunition for the firearm was contained in the vehicle in which the firearm was carried.

Summary of this case from Ashley v. State

In Amaya, the firearm was concealed under the passenger's seat and its clips and bullets were lying separately in open view on the passenger's seat.

Summary of this case from Ashley v. State

In Amaya, as in this case, the defendant was charged with carrying a concealed weapon in violation of section 790.01(2).

Summary of this case from State v. Ashley
Case details for

Amaya v. State

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL ARITA AMAYA, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Jun 7, 1991

Citations

580 So. 2d 885 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

State v. Weyant

See Ridley v. State, 621 So.2d 409, 409 (Fla. 1993) (holding that an unloaded firearm located under a…

State v. Ashley

According to Ashley, the firearm found in his car was not readily accessible for immediate use because it was…