JUAN DANIEL NAVA
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A defendant's signed stipulation to certain facts precludes the defendant from contending on appeal that such stipulation was not knowing or voluntary. Additionally, Florida's firearms statute is constitutional, and federal law does not require a twelve-person jury.
[1] A defendant's signed stipulation to certain facts precludes the defendant from contending on appeal that the stipulation was not knowing or voluntary.
[2] Florida Statutes section 790.23 is constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Florida Constitution.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJuan Daniel Nava was convicted in the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit in St. Lucie County. Nava signed a stipulation agreeing to cer…
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.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
JUAN DANIEL NAVA, Appellant,
V.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2025-1214 [April 1, 2026]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Michael James Linn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2022CF000513 A. Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender and Jeffrey L. Anderson, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sorraya M. Solages-Jones, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Thomas v. State, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D83 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 7, 2026) (holding that a defendant's signed stipulation to certain facts precludes the claim on appeal that such a stipulation was not knowing or voluntary); Nelson v. State, 195 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1967) (holding that section 790.23, Florida Statutes, is constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Florida Constitution); accord Guillen v. State, 423 So. 3d 50 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025); see also Guzman v. State, 350 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (rejecting the claim that the federal constitution requires a twelve person jury).
GROSS, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur. * * *
Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nava v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)…al that such a stipulation was not knowing or voluntary); Nelson v. State, 195 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1967) (holding that section 790.23, Florida Statutes, is constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Florida Constitution); accord Guillen v. State, 423 So. 3d 50 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025); see also Guzman v. State, 350 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (rejecting the claim that the federal constitution requires a twelve person jury). GROSS, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely…
Authorities Cited
- Guzman v. State, 350 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
- Walls v. State, 195 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 1967)
- Nava v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)