Call us now:
Florida’s Open Carry Ban Declared Unconstitutional by First District Court of Appeal – Controlling in Alachua, Levy, Bradford, Gilchrist and more.
In a landmark decision today in McDaniels v State, the First District Court of Appeal has struck down Florida’s long-standing prohibition on the open carrying of firearms, holding that the ban violates the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. This ruling makes clear that Florida Statute § 790.053, which barred ordinary citizens from openly carrying firearms in public, cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny.
The case came about due to the concerted effort of Mr. Stanley McDaniel to challenge Florida’s open carry law in Court, which is clear from the facts of the case. Mr. McDaniel’s arrest came after he was waving at passersby on a road while holding a copy of the constitution, and displayed a holstered firearm on his waist, while videorecording himself with a camera on a tripod.
This set up the perfect scenario for Mr. McDaniel to be arrested for open carry, while avoiding other charges (like carrying a concealed firearm – he also had a carrying concealed permit). Once he challenged his arrest in the lower Court and was denied, his appeal was ripe and the case landed in the 1st DCA, who wrote an extensive opinion including legal analysis of US Supreme Court precedent and Florida legal tests and their origin. Those issues can be found by reading the full opinion, but arent really that important for getting the gist of what occurred legally today.
The Court’s Framework
Following guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), the court applied a two-step inquiry:
- Does the Second Amendment’s plain text cover the regulated conduct?
The court held that it does. The right “to keep and bear Arms” includes carrying them openly in public for purposes of self-defense. The text makes no distinction between carrying arms in the home versus in public, nor between concealed versus open carry. - Is the restriction consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation?
The State failed to meet its burden. While some early laws restricted concealed carry or imposed conditions on dangerous individuals, no historical tradition supports a categorical prohibition on open carry. In fact, history shows the opposite: open carry was understood as the legitimate, constitutionally protected method of bearing arms, while concealed carry was viewed with suspicion.
The Historical Record
The appellate court emphasized that the founding generation—and courts interpreting the right throughout the 19th century—distinguished between open and concealed carry.
- In Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243 (1846), the Georgia Supreme Court held that prohibiting open carry violated the right to bear arms.
- In State v. Reid, 1 Ala. 612 (1840), the Alabama Supreme Court recognized that open carry could not be prohibited because it was the functional exercise of the right to self-defense.
- Florida’s own Supreme Court, in Sutton v. State, 12 Fla. 135 (1867), upheld a prohibition on concealed carry while expressly protecting open carry.
These authorities, cited by the U.S. Supreme Court in both Heller and Bruen, underscore that open carry was considered the constitutionally protected mode of bearing arms, while restrictions were traditionally placed only on concealed carry.
The Court’s Conclusion
The First District Court of Appeal concluded that Florida’s statute cannot be reconciled with the Second Amendment:
“No historical tradition supports Florida’s Open Carry Ban. To the contrary, history confirms that the right to bear arms in public necessarily includes the right to do so openly.”
The court declared Florida’s Open Carry Ban unconstitutional and answered the certified question in the affirmative.
Implications for Florida Citizens
This entire case came about because the police were concerned with a man on a streetcorner who was visibly displaying a firearm in a holster. Ultimately this man wanted to challenge the open carry law, but the police like many reasonable citizens were most likely concerned about the possible danger of an armed man displaying a weapon near other people. Many would believe that the sight of armed citizens is so uncommon that modern society has created a new norm that we all live by. But this norm, codified by the Florida legislature years ago is now under attack by those who value the open display of firearms.
This decision marks a profound shift in Florida firearms law. While the legislature may still enact reasonable regulations consistent with historical traditions—such as restrictions on carrying with criminal intent or in narrowly defined sensitive places—it cannot impose a blanket ban on open carry. Until the legislature enacts a new law, the open carry law should not be enforced within the 1st DCA region, and may actually be adopted by other appellate jurisdictions around Florida. After this case, there is nothing stopping someone from open carrying in our area without running afoul of Fl. St. 790.053.
For citizens, this means that the constitutional right to carry arms now includes the right to carry them openly in public for lawful self-defense. For practitioners, it signals a dramatic change in the legal landscape, with immediate implications for ongoing prosecutions and future challenges under the Second Amendment.
Why Retaining an Attorney Matters
Criminal Defense Lawyer Matt Landsman at Landsman Law helps people accused of crimes in Gainesville, Alachua County, Bradford County, Levy County, Gilchrist County, and surrounding areas of north Florida. If you need help for yourself or a loved one, contact Criminal Defense Attorney Matt Landsman for a free consultation today. For help with any Criminal Matter from Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer Matt Landsman – CALL NOW
If you’re accused of any criminal matter, retaining an attorney is critical to protecting your rights. These cases will involve constitutional questions and concern allegations of misconduct or are sensitive in nature, requiring a skill, preparation and experience. For expert legal help, contact Gainesville Defense Lawyer Matt Landsman to protect your rights today.