JOSHUA EPPS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Joshua Epps challenged his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon under Florida Statutes section 790.23(1)(a), arguing the statute violates the Second Amendment in light of District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago. The court affirmed his conviction, holding that Heller and McDonald expressly preserved prohibitions on firearm possession by felons and do not undermine existing Florida law.
The statute does not violate the Second Amendment. Although Heller and McDonald recognized Second Amendment rights to keep and use firearms within the home for self-defense, both decisions expressly stated that the rulings should not be viewed as casting doubt on prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons, thereby preserving the constitutionality of section 790.23(1)(a).
[1] A statute prohibiting felons from possessing firearms does not violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
[2] United States Supreme Court decisions in District of Columbia v. …
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the Supreme Court ruled that certain enactments in other jurisdictions, which broadly precluded the general populations there from possessing handguns, violated the Second Amendment in connection with the right to keep and use firearms within the home for self-defense. But that is not the circumstance under which the appellant was convicted in the present case.”
Distinguishes the broad handgun prohibitions addressed in Heller and McDonald from Florida's targeted prohibition on felon firearm possession
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEpps was convicted under Florida Statutes section 790.23(1)(a) for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He appealed the conviction on constit…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Possession Of A Firearm By A Convicted Felon cases and more on FLexlaw
Challenging his conviction under section 790.23(l)(a), Florida Statutes, for possession of a firearm by convicted felon, the appellant contends that the statute violates his right to bear arms pursuant to the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. While acknowledging that the statute has been upheld against prior constitutional challenges in cases such as Nelson v. State, 195 So.2d 853 (Fla.1967), the appellant maintains that the statute will no longer survive scrutiny in light of more recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008), and McDonald v. City of Chicago, - U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 3020, 177 L.Ed.2d 894 (2010). In those cases the Supreme Court ruled that certain enactments in other jurisdictions, which broadly precluded the general populations there from possessing handguns, violated the Second Amendment in connection with the right to keep and use firearms within the home for self-defense. But that is not the circumstance under which the appellant was convicted in the present case. Furthermore, in both Heller and McDonald the Court expressly stated that the rulings in those cases should not be viewed as casting doubt on “prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons....” Heller and McDonald thus do not undermine the Florida rulings in cases such as Nelson, with regard to the constitutionality of section 790.23(l)(a). See also Leon-Estrada v. Secretary, Dep’t of Corrections, 2010 WL 3069475 (M.D.Fla. August 4, 2010). The appellant’s conviction under section 790.23(l)(a) is therefore AFFIRMED.
KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Deron Javoris Burroughs v. State, 123 So. 3d 1161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
-
Edenfield v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2023)
Authorities Cited
- Dist. OF Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. 2008)
- McDONALD v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (U.S. 2010)
- Walls v. State, 195 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1967)
- Nelson v. State, 195 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1967)