Can a Felon Use “Stand Your Ground”?

The Florida Supreme Court decision affects one of the most significant questions in modern self-defense law: Can a convicted felon legally claim “Stand Your Ground” immunity if they use a firearm in self-defense?

This question sits at the intersection of two major areas of Florida law: firearm possession by felons and justifiable use of deadly force. The answer will not only determine how courts handle cases involving felons and firearms but also define the reach of Florida’s highly debated Stand Your Ground statute for years to come. If you’ve been accused of illegal possession of a firearm while you were attempting to protect yourself, you could face serious charges. A Tampa gun charge defense lawyer can make all the difference in your case. Contact Metcalf Falls to schedule your consultation: (813) 258-4800.

What Does Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” Law Actually Say?

Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute allows individuals to use or threaten to use deadly force if they reasonably believe such force is necessary to prevent imminent death, great bodily harm, or the commission of a forcible felony. Importantly, this law also removes the duty to retreat—meaning that someone facing a credible threat does not have to attempt escape before defending themselves.

Here’s the core of the statute:

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so…”

The phrase “not engaged in an unlawful activity” is where the legal conflict begins for felons. Under Florida law, a convicted felon cannot legally possess a firearm. Therefore, when a felon uses a gun to defend themselves, the act of possession itself could qualify as “unlawful activity,” which might disqualify them from invoking the protection of the statute.

Why Is the Stand Your Ground Concept So Legally Complex?

The complexity stems from how Florida’s appellate courts have interpreted the law differently. Two of Florida’s five District Courts of Appeal (DCAs) have issued opposing rulings on whether felons can claim Stand Your Ground protection.

This legal divide has forced trial courts to apply inconsistent standards depending on their jurisdiction. Until the Florida Supreme Court resolves the issue, whether a felon can “stand their ground” depends largely on where in the state the case is prosecuted.

What Did the Fourth District Court of Appeal Decide?

The Fourth District Court of Appeal addressed the issue in State v. Hill (95 So. 3d 434, Fla. 4th DCA 2012).

In that case, Hill—a convicted felon—used a firearm during an altercation and claimed immunity under Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute. A trial court initially dismissed his charges, accepting that his use of the firearm was defensive. However, the State appealed.

The Fourth DCA reversed the trial court’s decision, holding that Hill was engaged in unlawful activity by possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. According to the court, this criminal act disqualified him from Stand Your Ground immunity.

The key takeaway from Hill:

A felon’s illegal possession of a firearm constitutes unlawful activity, which means they cannot claim Stand Your Ground immunity, though they may still argue traditional self-defense at trial.

This interpretation has been binding precedent in the Fourth DCA’s jurisdiction since 2012.

How Did the Second District Court of Appeal Reach a Different Conclusion?

Just one year later, in Little v. State (111 So. 3d 214, Fla. 2d DCA 2013), the Second District Court of Appeal took a very different approach.

The court ruled that a felon’s illegal possession of a firearm does not automatically prevent them from raising a Stand Your Ground claim. The reasoning was largely based on the structure of Florida’s self-defense statutes.

Section 776.012 (the general self-defense provision) does not contain the “not engaged in unlawful activity” limitation found in Section 776.013 (which specifically governs home protection). Therefore, according to the Second DCA, the legislature intentionally omitted that restriction from the broader self-defense law.

The Second DCA concluded that since Little’s defense was based on §776.012, he was entitled to immunity—even though he possessed a firearm illegally.
This created a direct conflict between Florida’s Second and Fourth DCAs, forcing the issue toward eventual resolution by the Florida Supreme Court.

What Is the Pardo Rule and Why Does It Matter?

Under the Pardo rule (Pardo v. State, 596 So. 2d 665, Fla. 1992), a ruling by any DCA applies statewide unless and until another DCA reaches a conflicting result. Once appellate courts disagree, trial courts must follow the DCA that has jurisdiction over them. Courts in other districts may then choose which precedent to follow until the Florida Supreme Court intervenes.

Here’s what that means for defendants today:

• In Fourth DCA jurisdictions (including Palm Beach, Broward, Indian River, St. Lucie, Okeechobee, and Martin counties), Hill Felons in possession of a firearm cannot claim Stand Your Ground.
• In Second DCA jurisdictions (including Tampa Bay and southwest Florida), Little Felons can raise Stand Your Ground immunity despite their illegal possession.
• In all other DCAs (First, Third, Fifth, and Sixth), judges are free to adopt either precedent until the Supreme Court provides uniform guidance.

What Happened When the Florida Supreme Court Declined to Hear the Case?

Rather than resolving the question, the Florida Supreme Court declined to review the issue of whether convicted felons can invoke the Stand Your Ground defense when illegally possessing a firearm. By denying the appeal, the Court effectively left intact the conflicting decisions from Florida’s appellate courts—meaning there is still no uniform statewide rule on this matter.

This denial of review has important legal consequences. Because the Supreme Court did not intervene, the rulings of the Second District Court of Appeal (Little v. State) and the Fourth District Court of Appeal (State v. Hill) remain binding within their respective jurisdictions. The result is a geographically divided standard for self-defense law in Florida:

• In the Fourth DCA’s jurisdiction (covering counties such as Broward, Palm Beach, and St. Lucie), felons in possession of a firearm cannot claim Stand Your Ground immunity.
• In the Second DCA’s jurisdiction (covering Tampa Bay and southwest Florida), felons may raise a Stand Your Ground claim, even if their firearm possession was illegal.
• The remaining DCAs (First, Third, Fifth, and Sixth) can choose which ruling to follow until the Supreme Court or Legislature provides clarification.

In effect, the Florida Supreme Court’s refusal to take the case has prolonged the uncertainty. Whether a felon may legally “stand their ground” still depends on where in Florida the case arises—a patchwork outcome that continues to challenge both prosecutors and defense attorneys across the state.

Can a Felon Still Claim Self-Defense Without “Stand Your Ground”?

Yes. Even if a felon cannot invoke Stand Your Ground immunity, they can still argue traditional self-defense at trial. The difference lies in the procedural protection Stand Your Ground provides.

• Traditional self-defense is a trial defense. The defendant admits to the act but argues that it was justified under the circumstances. The burden then shifts to the prosecution to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Stand Your Ground immunity, on the other hand, allows defendants to seek pretrial dismissal of charges if the judge finds that the use of force was justified. If immunity is granted, the defendant cannot be prosecuted at all.

In short, Stand Your Ground provides a shield before trial, while self-defense provides one during trial.

How Does “Unlawful Activity” Affect Other Stand Your Ground Cases?

The term “unlawful activity” has long been a gray area in Florida’s self-defense law. Courts have interpreted it broadly in some cases and narrowly in others. For example, individuals engaged in drug transactions, burglary, or other criminal conduct are typically denied immunity.

The unresolved question is whether simple firearm possession by a felon—without any accompanying violent or felonious intent—should fall into that same category. The Florida Supreme Court’s decision will clarify whether the nature of the unlawful act (mere possession versus active criminal conduct) matters for Stand Your Ground eligibility.

What Does This Mean for Defense Attorneys and Defendants?

Until the Supreme Court provides clarity, defense attorneys across Florida must be meticulous when handling self-defense cases involving felons. Legal strategy may hinge on the jurisdiction where the case is filed and which appellate precedent the local courts follow.

Defendants should not assume that simply claiming “self-defense” will guarantee immunity. The nuances of the statute, and its differing interpretations across the state, make it essential to work with an experienced criminal defense lawyer who understands both statutory interpretation and precedent conflicts.

FAQs about Florida’s Stand Your Ground Concept

Can a felon ever legally possess a firearm in Florida?

No. Under Florida Statute §790.23, it is a second-degree felony for a convicted felon to possess, own, or control a firearm, punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Does “Stand Your Ground” automatically apply if someone claims self-defense?

No. The defendant must establish the elements of the defense and typically request a pretrial immunity hearing. The prosecution can then challenge the claim by presenting evidence that the defendant was not lawfully standing their ground.

If the Florida Supreme Court sides with the Fourth DCA, what happens next?

Felons would remain ineligible for Stand Your Ground immunity, but they could still argue self-defense at trial. The Legislature might also face pressure to clarify or amend the law.

If the Florida Supreme Court sides with the Second DCA, will felons be immune from prosecution?

Not necessarily. Felons would still face felon-in-possession charges, but they could seek immunity from prosecution for the use of force itself if it was otherwise lawful.

Why does the distinction between §776.012 and §776.013 matter?

Because §776.012 (general self-defense) lacks the “unlawful activity” limitation found in §776.013 (home protection). The Second DCA used this structural difference to justify allowing felons to claim Stand Your Ground under §776.012.

How can defendants protect themselves in these cases?

By contacting an experienced criminal defense attorney familiar with both Stand Your Ground and firearm possession laws. Legal representation is crucial in determining whether immunity or a traditional self-defense argument is the best strategy.

Contact a Tampa Self-Defense Lawyer Today

If you’re trying to move forward with your life after a criminal conviction, and you’ve been accused of possessing a firearm, you need an empathetic and aggressive defense attorney. Your situation could be a misunderstanding, but you need someone who knows the nuances of self-defense law that will fight for your rights and freedom. Metcalf Falls is the law firm who will be by your side through the whole defense. We understand how ex-convicts are viewed in society, and we want to ensure your story is heard and you get a fair chance at getting your charges dropped or reduced.

Gun-possession charges as a felon can be complex, but we’re prepared to do what it takes to explain your situation and fight for your freedom. Don’t wait. Contact us today for a free initial consultation.