RUBEN URQUIOLA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1991-12-03
No. 90-2908
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and GERSTEN, JJ.
590 So. 2d 497 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Urquiola was charged with unlawfully carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle. The court reversed his conviction, holding that a firearm in a plastic pouch with a flap constitutes being "securely encased" under Florida law, making the possession lawful.


Holding

The court held that the firearm was "securely encased" within the meaning of Section 790.25(5), Florida Statutes, and the statutory definition of "securely encased" in Section 790.001(16), Florida Statutes. A container need not be locked, zipped, or attached in any particular way; it is sufficient that the firearm cannot be accessed for immediate use without opening the lid.


Headnotes

[1] A firearm is "securely encased" for purposes of Florida law when it is in a closed container that requires a lid or cover to be opened for access, regardless of whether t…

[2] A glove compartment in an automobile qualifies as a secure container for a firearm, even if it is not locked.

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“The gun in the instant case could not have been put to use by the defendant without opening the lid of the pouch. We therefore hold that it was "securely encased" within the meaning of Section 790.25(5), Florida Statutes (1989)”

The court's holding that accessibility is the key factor in determining whether a firearm is securely encased, not the method of securing the container.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A firearm was found in a plastic pouch hanging from the dashboard of Urquiola's vehicle with a flap laid over it. The gun could not be put to use with…

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.

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellee, in its supplemental brief, having admitted1 that the gun in the instant case was in a container and could not be removed without opening the lid, in effect, concedes that the firearm was encased within the exception of Section 790.25(5), Florida Statutes (1989).2 Although the law enforcement officers and apparently the trial court, believe that the container lid must be secured by a zipper, or attached in some way or there will be a violation of Section 790.25(5), Florida Statutes (1989), we have held that a glove compartment in an automobile does not have to be locked to be a secure container. See City of Miami v. Swift, 481 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Other courts have held that a man’s purse constitutes a secure container. Alexander v. State, 477 So. 2d 557 (Fla.1985). The gun in the instant case could not have been put to use by the defendant without opening the lid of the pouch. We therefore hold that it was “securely encased” within the meaning of Section 790.25(5), Florida Statutes (1989), and the legislative definition of “securely encased” found in Section 790.-001(16), Florida Statutes (1989)3, which is controlling herein. See Gray v. Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co., 64 So. 2d 650 (Fla.1952) and Greenleaf & Crosby Co. v. Coleman, 158 So. 421, 117 Fla. 723 (Fla.1934). We therefore reverse the adjudication of guilt with directions to grant the motion to dismiss.

. “If, as the state contends in its supplemental brief, the trial court had relied on the deposition of the trooper, then the gun was hanging from the dashboard in a plastic pouch with a flap laid over it. Then, following this Court’s decision in City of Miami v. Swift, 481 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), rev. den., 491 So. 2d 278 (Fla.1986), the gun in this case was “securely encased” as defined by Section 790.001(16), Florida Statutes (1989).”

. Section 790.25(5), Florida Statutes (1989).

(5) POSSESSION IN PRIVATE CONVEYANCE.

Notwithstanding subsection (2), it is lawful and is not a violation of s. 790.01 to possess a concealed firearm or other weapon for self-defense or other lawful purpose within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use. Nothing herein contained prohibits the carrying of a legal firearm other than a handgun anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for lawful use. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm or other weapon on the person. This subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided in s. 776.012.

.Section 790.001(16), Florida Statutes (1989).

(16) "Securely encased” means encased in a glove compartment, whether or not locked; in a snapped holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Trock v. State, 990 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
    …refore, the crime of carrying a concealed firearm did not occur); Bell v. State, 636 So. 2d 80, 81 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (revolver enclosed in the center console of a vehicle was securely encased by the very definition of that term); Urquiola v. State, 590 So. 2d 497, 498 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (where the firearm was in a "plastic pouch with a flap laid over it” and could not be removed without opening the flap, it was "encased” within the exception of section 790.25(5)). . We note, on behalf of the trial judg…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw