Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

621 So. 2d 409

621 So.2d 409

18 Fla.L.WeeklySupp. 395

Ridley v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided July 1, 1993

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1993-07-01

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 2008

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1993-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

KOGAN, Justice,

¶1dissenting.

¶2The statute plainly says that a person does not violate the law by carrying a weapon in a vehicle if “the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use.” § 790.25(5), Fla.Stat. (1991). Moreover, the statute is to be construed in favor of the “lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons.” Id. I see little relevant difference between a gun that is “securely encased” and one that has been fully emptied of ammunition. Indeed, an encased weapon in most circumstances will be more readily accessible than one that still must be loaded: Weapons cases typically can be opened in a single motion, whereas the loading of ammunition can take considerably longer. In light of the statutory language about “encased” weapons, I cannot say that the legislature intended the result reached by the majority here.

/621/so2d/409 · .json · Public domain