brief exposure / producing CWL

hammer6 · Jul 7, 2012

so here's a question- i know the statute says you have to produce your CWL when asked or pay the $25 fine...but when would that happen? since case law already says that simply having a concealed handgun isn't RAS for a cop to stop you and ask for a permit, because CC is legal with a permit in florida....unless of course, the cop sees the gun firsthand...right?

i'm just trying to figure out what the need is for a CWL if we aren't required to notify police officers, and if someone "rats me out" for having a gun, a cop can't legally stop and ask me if i have one..

thoughtsss?

notalawyer · Jul 7, 2012

hammer6 said:
so here's a question- i know the statute says you have to produce your CWL when asked or pay the $25 fine...but when would that happen? since case law already says that simply having a concealed handgun isn't RAS for a cop to stop you and ask for a permit, because CC is legal with a permit in florida....unless of course, the cop sees the gun firsthand...right?

i'm just trying to figure out what the need is for a CWL if we aren't required to notify police officers, and if someone "rats me out" for having a gun, a cop can't legally stop and ask me if i have one..

thoughtsss?

There is a conflict in that case law that has yet to be resolved by the Florida Supreme Court. Currently there is only one District where that case law applies. (Too lazy to go look up which one).

Please be prepared to be cuffed and stuffed if you fail to show you CWFL to a LEO upon demand, until such time as they determine if you do, in fact, possess a valid CWFL. That could take a while and possibly a trip to the jail before they could confirm your legal status.

hammer6 · Jul 7, 2012

notalawyer said:
There is a conflict in that case law that has yet to be resolved by the Florida Supreme Court. Currently there is only one District where that case law applies. (Too lazy to go look up which one).

Please be prepared to be cuffed and stuffed if you fail to show you CWFL to a LEO upon demand, until such time as they determine if you do, in fact, possess a valid CWFL. That could take a while and possibly a trip to the jail before they could confirm your legal status.

the penalty for not producing the CWL is a $25 fine...not a trip to jail?

my question was when would it be applicable for the LEO to ask for your CWL? since it's not required to do so upon contact.

notalawyer · Jul 7, 2012

hammer6 said:
the penalty for not producing the CWL is a $25 fine...not a trip to jail?

my question was when would it be applicable for the LEO to ask for your CWL? since it's not required to do so upon contact.

the penalty for not producing the CWL is a $25 fine...not a trip to jail?

That is for failure to display it. If you don't display it, how does the LEO know you actually have one and it is valid? Carrying a concealed firearm is a felony.
They have to check....are you being cooperative in providing them the information required to do so? Like I said, expect to be cuffed and sitting on the curb while they check it out if you are being cooperative, otherwise...

when would it be applicable for the LEO to ask for your CWL?

Don't take this the wrong way, but whenever he wants to. And it all depends on the nature of the contact.

Let's say you are pulled over for speeding and you left a pistol magazine on the front passenger seat. That might indicate that there are firearms in the vehicle, so the LEO might ask about them. If you choose to answer 'on my hip', he/she may then ask about your CWFL. Or you are wearing a Glock shirt, or dozens of other situations, or just because the LEO does it as a matter of course - a little weird, by you get the picture.

hammer6 · Jul 7, 2012

notalawyer said:
That is for failure to display it. How does the LEO know you actually have one and it is valid? They have to check....are you being cooperative in providing them the information required to do so? Like I said, expect to be cuffed and sitting on the curb while they check it out if you are being cooperative, otherwise...

Don't take this the wrong way, but whenever he wants to. And it all depends on the nature of the contact.

Let's say you are pulled over for speeding and you left a pistol magazine on the front passenger seat. That might indicate that there are firearms in the vehicle, so the LEO might ask about them. If you choose to answer 'on my hip', he/she may then ask about your CWFL. Or you are wearing a Glock shirt, or dozens of other situations, or just because the LEO does it as a matter of course - a little weird, by you get the picture.

i can see why you are "notalawyer". possessing a gun magazine (the one with bullets in it or a paper one you read), or wearing a GLOCK shirt, or just because the LEO chooses to ask...neither one of those are RAS for gun ownership. nor probable cause. so he asks for a CWL and you say you don't have one...he cuffs you to run your name, only to find out you really DON'T have a CWL, nor do you own a firearm. what a nice little 4th amendment violation, right?

once again, the statue says that brief exposure is legal. cop sees the gun for a split second. what law did you violate? what probable cause or RAS does he have to ask you if you have a CWL? carrying a concealed weapon with a license is a constitutional right in the state of florida... how can you be detained for doing something constitutional?

notalawyer · Jul 7, 2012

hammer6 said:
i can see why you are "notalawyer". possessing a gun magazine (the one with bullets in it or a paper one you read), or wearing a GLOCK shirt, or just because the LEO chooses to ask...neither one of those are RAS for gun ownership. nor probable cause. so he asks for a CWL and you say you don't have one...he cuffs you to run your name, only to find out you really DON'T have a CWL, nor do you own a firearm. what a nice little 4th amendment violation, right?

once again, the statue says that brief exposure is legal. cop sees the gun for a split second. what law did you violate? what probable cause or RAS does he have to ask you if you have a CWL? carrying a concealed weapon with a license is a constitutional right in the state of florida... how can you be detained for doing something constitutional?

You missed the part where I said "You choose to answer 'on my hip'"

...which gives the LEO reasonable suspicion that you are carrying a concealed firearm, possibly in violation of the law.

As I stated, we have to wait for the Florida Supreme Court to rule on the RAS/PC aspect. But today, if a LEO sees your concealed pistol briefly displayed (depending on the circumstances) and he asks to see your CWFL and you say I don't have one, you are going to jail! If you say "I don't have it on me" (or you choose just not to display it), he will likely cuff you till he figures out if you do or not. Of course this all depends on the individual LEO and the circumstances surrounding the contact.

LEO do not need RAS/PC to ask to see your CWFL, they need RAS/PC for a initial terry stop.

The courts have not ruled on what 'brief' means, so one LEO might think 2 seconds, another might think 20 minutes.....

how can you be detained for doing something constitutional?

Is this a rhetorical question?
Courts rule on what is Constitutional not street cops. If they feel your are breaking the law (carrying a concealed firearm) and you fail to cooperate by refusing to display your legal defense to that charge (a CWFL) you will be in cuffs. All perfectly legal and proper.

Now if you are walking down the street and the wind blows your cover shirt exposing your firearm and a LEO sees it, well like I said before, it all depends on the LEO.

hammer6 · Jul 8, 2012

notalawyer said:
You missed the part where I said "You choose to answer 'on my hip'" ...which gives the LEO reasonable suspicion that you are carrying a concealed firearm, possibly in violation of the law.

As I stated, we have to wait for the Florida Supreme Court to rule on the RAS/PC aspect. But today, if a LEO sees your concealed pistol briefly displayed (depending on the circumstances) and he asks to see your CWFL and you say I don't have one, you are going to jail! If you say "I don't have it on me" (or you choose just not to display it), he will likely cuff you till he figures out if you do or not. Of course this all depends on the individual LEO and the circumstances surrounding the contact.

LEO do not need RAS/PC to ask to see your CWFL, they need RAS/PC for a initial terry stop.

The courts have not ruled on what 'brief' means, so one LEO might think 2 seconds, another might think 20 minutes.....

Is this a rhetorical question?
Courts rule on what is Constitutional not street cops. If they feel your are breaking the law (carrying a concealed firearm) and you fail to cooperate by refusing to display your legal defense to that charge (a CWFL) you will be in cuffs. All perfectly legal and proper.

Now if you are walking down the street and the wind blows your cover shirt exposing your firearm and a LEO sees it, well like I said before, it all depends on the LEO.

i was commenting on "whenever he wants to"....

they need RAS/PC for a terry stop, and if they don't have that, how can they ask for your CWL? this is what i'm trying to figure out...if the only reason they can ask for a CWL is if they SEE your gun, then why do we need one in the first place? that's the point of my OP

MedWheeler · Jul 8, 2012

Notalawyer writes:

There is a conflict in that case law that has yet to be resolved by the Florida Supreme Court. Currently there is only one District where that case law applies. (Too lazy to go look up which one).

A similar thread broke out on another forum of which I am a member. I responded as follows:

For those interested, there are two cases that have been heard in the 3DCA. The first case is Mackey (Anthony) vs. State of Florida. In a nutshell, the defendant (a convicted felon and therefore a prohibited person when it comes to firearms, anyway) was arrested in 2010 after a patrol officer who spotted him standing alongside a fence observed the butt (referred to as the "handle" in the affidavit) of a handgun exposed and protruding from the pocket of the arrestee. The appeal was based on the idea that the officer would not have had probable cause to believe that a crime was taking place, since the mere possession of a concealed firearm in Florida is not illegal; the lack of a license to possess such would have to be suspected to warrant the stop.
The 3DCA upheld the conviction (which was actually a guilty plea) based partially on two things: the weapon was not fully concealed, which (at that time) was a violation in itself, and that the "affirmative defense" of the lack of suspicion of no-carry-license would, in effect, even strip away the authority of an officer to stop a man wearing a mask, hood, gloves, and climbing over broken glass into a clearly-broken window of a dark house at night simply because he would "have no reason to believe the subject had no right to be in the house."
In the Regalado case to which (another forum member) refers, the defendant was stopped by an officer after a citizen pointed him out as one he had just seen "displaying" a gun in his waistband. The citizen then leaves the encounter without identifying himself. The officer never saw the firearm until the defendant/arrestee was stopped and searched. The "affirmative defense" of the idea that the officer had no reason to suspect Regalado had no carry license, and would not have known he even had a firearm had it not been for the anonymous complaint, is what helped the defense in that case. I'm not clear on the outcome of that appeal, or if it has even been resolved yet.

hammer6 · Jul 8, 2012

MedWheeler said:
Notalawyer writes:

A similar thread broke out on another forum of which I am a member. I responded as follows:

which is exactly my point (the regalado case).

notalawyer · Jul 8, 2012

hammer6 said:
i was commenting on "whenever he wants to"....

they need RAS/PC for a terry stop, and if they don't have that, how can they ask for your CWL? this is what i'm trying to figure out...if the only reason they can ask for a CWL is if they SEE your gun, then why do we need one in the first place? that's the point of my OP

why do we need one in the first place?

Another rhetorical question?
Because the Florida legislature, as empowered by the Florida Constitution, has decided that it is a felony to carry a concealed firearm in Florida.
They have, in their generosity established certain exceptions to this absolute prohibition. One of which is licensing.:banghead:

if the only reason they can ask for a CWL is if they SEE your gun

As I tried to explain above, this is not the only reason they can ask. It all depends on the circumstances!

And finally, again, until the Florida Supreme Court decides on the conflict on a firearm being acceptable RAS/PC for a terry stop we will just have to wait. Even if they decide that the mere possession of a firearm is not RAS/PC for a terry stop, it will not prevent LEO from stopping folks anyway....it happens all the time with other laws!

ADulay · Jul 10, 2012

hammer6 said:
so here's a question- i know the statute says you have to produce your CWL when asked or pay the $25 fine...but when would that happen? since case law already says that simply having a concealed handgun isn't RAS for a cop to stop you and ask for a permit, because CC is legal with a permit in florida....unless of course, the cop sees the gun firsthand...right?

How about if you're open carrying (legally) and pull into some fast food place.

You put on your cover garment to go inside but in the process, a "concerned citizen" sees this and calls in a MWAG call to the local sheriff's office.

When the sheriff's show up and determines that you're the one the guy on the phone was talking about, but you're now fully concealed, this would probably be the time when they will ask you if you have a weapon (yes) and then ask you if you have a CCW permit (yes).

If you're polite and show them your CCW, they will most probably go away happy in the knowledge that the concealed weapon you're wearing while eating those chili fries is perfectly legal.

AD (don't ask me how I know this)

hammer6 · Jul 11, 2012

ADulay said:
How about if you're open carrying (legally) and pull into some fast food place.

You put on your cover garment to go inside but in the process, a "concerned citizen" sees this and calls in a MWAG call to the local sheriff's office.

When the sheriff's show up and determines that you're the one the guy on the phone was talking about, but you're now fully concealed, this would probably be the time when they will ask you if you have a weapon (yes) and then ask you if you have a CCW permit (yes).

If you're polite and show them your CCW, they will most probably go away happy in the knowledge that the concealed weapon you're wearing while eating those chili fries is perfectly legal.

AD (don't ask me how I know this)

okay- but if you are open carrying legally, and conceal carrying legally, then you have committed no crime, and the presence of a firearm legally carried is not grounds for a stop. i mean, haven't you seen that video from the kid in maine last month? that's one of the court cases he uses...

FLORIDA v. J. L.
US v. DeBerry

"Originally Posted by notalawyer-"
- As I tried to explain above, this is not the only reason they can ask. It all depends on the circumstances!

And finally, again, until the Florida Supreme Court decides on the conflict on a firearm being acceptable RAS/PC for a terry stop we will just have to wait. Even if they decide that the mere possession of a firearm is not RAS/PC for a terry stop, it will not prevent LEO from stopping folks anyway....it happens all the time with other laws! -

what circumstances? if they don't see a gun, then how can they ask for a CWL? how?

notalawyer · Jul 11, 2012

hammer6 said:
okay- but if you are open carrying legally, and conceal carrying legally, then you have committed no crime, and the presence of a firearm legally carried is not grounds for a stop. i mean, haven't you seen that video from the kid in maine last month? that's one of the court cases he uses...

FLORIDA v. J. L.
US v. DeBerry

"Originally Posted by notalawyer-"
- As I tried to explain above, this is not the only reason they can ask. It all depends on the circumstances!

And finally, again, until the Florida Supreme Court decides on the conflict on a firearm being acceptable RAS/PC for a terry stop we will just have to wait. Even if they decide that the mere possession of a firearm is not RAS/PC for a terry stop, it will not prevent LEO from stopping folks anyway....it happens all the time with other laws! -

what circumstances? if they don't see a gun, then how can they ask for a CWL? how?

and the presence of a firearm legally carried is not grounds for a stop

I keep pointing this out to you and you fail to grasp it. One District Court of Appeals in Florida has ruled that it is. Another ruled that it is not, thus we have a certified conflict. Until the Supreme Court of Florida decides, we take our chances. There are scores, perhaps hundreds, of other court cases regarding this topic, some of the stops have been ruled to be valid, many have not. Again, IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES AT THE TIME OF THE STOP!

The totality of the circumstance is what is going to matter in court.
Time and place of the contact. Late at night in a high crime area, middle of the day at the mall. Traffic stop - Driver? Passenger?, 911 complaint, etc.
Then you'll need to define 'see a gun'. A bulge, part of the grip, part of the muzzle, an outline, a magazine or speed loader, etc.
Then you have to take into consideration the LEO's training and experience, whether you like it or not this will be a significant factor in court.
And on and on....

It is no where as simple as you or I would like it to be.

77zach · Jul 11, 2012

notalawyer said:
It is no where as simple as you or I would like it to be.

And never will be until the Fl constitution reads like my signature.

notalawyer · Jul 11, 2012

77zach said:
And never will be until the Fl constitution reads like my signature.

Any law that imposes a check, fee, license, or permit to buy, sell, keep or carry arms is void upon passage

This would not be proper terminology in the Constitution.

I think what we have is place in 790.33(3) is closer to what needs to be in the constitution, reworded of course.

Why this? Why are they special?

except that nothing will prohibit the regulation of carrying arms into publicly owned buildings, which buildings require a screening process for arms at all entrances and maintain armed security personnel at all entrances

77zach · Jul 11, 2012

notalawyer said:
This would not be proper terminology in the Constitution.

Should be.

Schools or courtrooms or prisons should have a legal avenue to regulate weapons if need be.

notalawyer · Jul 11, 2012

77zach said:
Should be.

Schools or courtrooms or prisons should have a legal avenue to regulate weapons if need be.

No, the State should regulate prisons as they do today - as permitted by the Constitution. (I'm not yet convinced that carry should be prohibited in courtrooms. Inside prisons, where inmates are located, yes.)

And tell me again why schools are different than the DMV or the Tax Collector's office, or the park.

Schools around you have armed security and metal detectors at all entrances? Wow, that would not be a place where I would want my grandchildren to have to be.

77zach · Jul 11, 2012

notalawyer said:
No, the State should regulate prisons as they do today - as permitted by the Constitution. (I'm not yet convinced that carry should be prohibited in courtrooms. Inside prisons, where inmates are located, yes.)

And tell me again why schools are different than the DMV or the Tax Collector's office, or the park.

Schools around you have armed security and metal detectors at all entrances? Wow, that would not be a place where I would want my grandchildren to have to be.

What I wrote is crystal clear to me. No schools will have that. Therefore, schools will not be permitted to regulate carry. It doesn't say a government building MUST regulate only that they MAY if those very strict conditions are met. Since you're not the first person to be confused by this, I guess I'll have to rewrite my signature.

But you're right no constitutional changes are really required. If I were dictator, I'd just delete 98% of section 790 Fl statutes. Problems solved. The people who wrote this shiit are really tyrannical, stupid, ninnying freaks who need to be locked up for their libido dominandi.

ADulay · Jul 11, 2012

hammer6 said:
okay- but if you are open carrying legally, and conceal carrying legally, then you have committed no crime, and the presence of a firearm legally carried is not grounds for a stop. .....

..... if they don't see a gun, then how can they ask for a CWL? how?

How can they ask for a CWL? Uh, they just got a call from a concerned citizen about a man with a gun who just walked into the local burger joint. As openly carried weapons are not the norm for Florida, I can see where some people might be overly concerned. Not everyone is as enlightened as us!!

Anyway, the person has been identified as the "person with the gun" and they would now like to confirm that you are legally carrying that weapon.

Even though they can't SEE the weapon, they now have a REASONABLE expectation that the person is carrying a weapon and they might want to just confirm that it's all legal.

Produce the CWL, shake hands, say "Thanks for checking" and move along with the rest of your day.

When that original "man with a gun" call came into the dispatcher, who's to say what the "concerned citizen" really said? They may have made it sound like Rambo was about to order a double cheeseburger with an M-60 over his shoulder and Uzi's in every pocket. Citizens have been known to exaggerate the facts for sure. Under these circumstances, I would think the officers would want to at least confirm that all was right with the world at this time.

AD

notalawyer · Jul 11, 2012

ADulay said:
How can they ask for a CWL? Uh, they just got a call from a concerned citizen about a man with a gun who just walked into the local burger joint. As openly carried weapons are not the norm for Florida, I can see where some people might be overly concerned. Not everyone is as enlightened as us!!

Anyway, the person has been identified as the "person with the gun" and they would now like to confirm that you are legally carrying that weapon.

Even though they can't SEE the weapon, they now have a REASONABLE expectation that the person is carrying a weapon and they might want to just confirm that it's all legal.

Produce the CWL, shake hands, say "Thanks for checking" and move along with the rest of your day.

When that original "man with a gun" call came into the dispatcher, who's to say what the "concerned citizen" really said? They may have made it sound like Rambo was about to order a double cheeseburger with an M-60 over his shoulder and Uzi's in every pocket. Citizens have been known to exaggerate the facts for sure. Under these circumstances, I would think the officers would want to at least confirm that all was right with the world at this time.

AD

Just a minor point of clarification..

Even though they can't SEE the weapon, they now have a REASONABLE expectation that the person is carrying a weapon and they might want to just confirm that it's all legal.

As you point out in your last paragraph, depending on 911 call, if any, and what was said, and if the caller remained anonymous, etc. they MAY have had resonablbe suspicion (that would hold up in court) that would allow them to perform a Terry stop and then check license status.

brief exposure / producing CWL

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member