FLORIDA FIREARMS – Law, Use & Ownership

       The use of deadly force to stop an animal attack on yourself is legal as long as it is reasonable. King v. State, 12 So.3d 1271 (Fla. 5DCA 2009). But, what happens if the State still decides to prosecute you? Probably you should have voted for a different State Attorney, Sheriff, and maybe even Mayor or City Council since they hire their local Chief of Police. You also might wonder why the hell media didn’t run stories supporting the use of deadly force to raise local awareness? But politics aside, it can happen – and did in the recent case of Gabriel v. State, 49 Fla.L.Weekly D2063 (Fla. 4DCA 10/16/2024), where Mr. Gabriel and his small dog were attacked by an unleashed pit bull, and despite Gabriel’s many efforts to dissuade the dog from the attack, it continued its threatening behavior until it had backed him and his dog into a corner. Mr. Gabriel didn’t have pepper spray with him (which usually works), and after the unsuccessful firing of warning shots, and fearing imminent attack – he finally shot the dog dead. Of course, you’d think the local constabulary, and State Attorney would shake his hand – but instead, he was arrested, and prosecuted for the crimes of cruelty to animals, discharging a firearm in public, and discharging a firearm in a residential area! Only in America!

       Now, while the use of self defense, and even defense of other domestic animals is assured by Florida law (the Palm Beach State Attorneys Office obviously can’t read) – the question that was raised in the Gabriel case was whether pre-trial “immunity” (not the ultimate question of whether it was lawful self defense, or not) also applied – because if “immunity” did apply, the defense had an important available tactic to require a pre-trial evidentiary hearing where the State had the burden of proving that self defense didn’t apply by clear and convincing evidence. Such a motion can not only head off a trial months in advance – but also serves as an important discovery tool. So, having such a hearing is very important to the defense in almost every self defense case. However, in this instance, the State argued that “immunity” only applied to defense against “humans” – and not “animals”. A case of first impression in Florida

       Unfortunately, the Palm Beach State Attorneys Office had it in for Mr. Gabriel, and also the legal question. The trial judge, Judge Scott Suskauer, ruled for the State, held that immunity didn’t apply to self defense against animal attacks, denied the immunity motion, and set the case for trial. If you live in Palm Beach County, please remember him when he next comes up for re-election. Defense counsel then took a type of appeal called “certiorari” to the appropriate appellate court – also in Palm Beach County – and they reversed the decision of the lower court holding that Florida Statute 776.012 did indeed apply to the use of deadly force against an animal attack, and that an immunity hearing must be held in any such case if requested.

     So, Truth-Justice-and the American Way – finally won out – likely at great financial cost to Mr. Gabriel, including many sleepless nights. The prosecutors, on the other hand, slept fine, but lack backbone. Hopefully, they will never be attacked by a pit bull, or any other larger dog – as the lack of a firearm or other weapon can result in some very serious and painful injuries, even death – most of which I can personally testify to since I was once attacked by a Rottweiler when unarmed, and learned the hard way – lucky to survive.