Opinion
Florida – -(AmmoLand.com)- In a pending legal case of LEONARDO LYNCH v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT the Florida Attorny General Ashley Moody argued that the Florida Department Of Law Enforcement does not have to provide any evidence or proof and should not be questioned when it denies anyone their right to purchase firearms.
When a firearm is purchased, FDLE runs a background check against the National Instant Check System (NICS). If someone is flagged in the NICS system as having a potentially disqualifying history, Florida Department Of Law Enforcement (FDLE) is required to obtain proof that the NICS flag is valid. Some anti-Second Amendment states refuse to cooperate with FDLE by providing records and enter many people into NICS who are not federally disqualified from firearm ownership.
Florida Department Of Law Enforcement is the Point of Contact for NICS in Florida.
Mr Lynch is an Active Duty U.S. Navy Sailor stationed in Florida who FDLE has denied the right to purchase a firearm based solely on an unproven NICS flag placed by the State of New York.
Florida Carry is not a party to this case but is watching it closely.
Summary of the Florida Attorney General’s Official Position (embedded below) on the Purchase of Firearms:
1. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) should not be required to produce any evidence or proof that an individual is a prohibited person prior to the denial of a constitutional right.
2. The Court should accept FDLE’s statement that a person is prohibited from purchasing firearms without any evidence to support FDLE’s claim.
3. FDLE can allege that a person is prohibited from purchasing firearms and is not required to offer any evidence that the purchaser is prohibited.
4. FDLE has full discretion as to whether a purchase denial is final, and the courts have no authority to require FDLE to issue a final decision, even almost a year later.
5. If a purchaser does have a right to the entry of a final decision by FDLE through mandamus the 1st DCA should exercise discretion and refuse to compel a final decision in this case because NY law prevents FDLE from obtaining proof of FDLE’s claims.
6. Compelling FDLE to render a final decision and granting appellate review would force FDLE to give purchasers an approval when FDLE is unable to prove they are actually a prohibited person.
7. A purchaser prohibited by FDLE cannot require FDLE to render a final decision that would be subject to judicial review.
8. A purchaser that FDLE claims is prohibited has no right to appellate judicial review of FDLE’s decision in a Florida court.
9. A purchaser has an obligation to prove they are not a prohibited person even though FDLE has offered no evidence or documentation that the individual is actually prohibited.
10. A mental health record (that no evidence has been produced even exist) is a criminal history record. Despite a prior AG opinion regarding Florida’s mental health law stating that mental health issues should not be treated as criminal cases.
11. FDLE’s statutory authority to create rules for review of criminal history records applies to records that are not criminal history records as defined by Florida law.
12. The specific authority under the Brady Act to bring an action against a denying agency does not apply to a purchaser seeking appellate review of an FDLE denial.
13. FDLE is not subject to the Florida Administrative Procedures Act (APA) when it denies a person the fundamental right to purchase a firearm.
14. A person seeking to purchase a firearm is similar to a criminal seeking to seal or expunge their record.
15. Because the Legislature gave an express right to Concealed Weapon and Firearm License (CWFL) applicants to seek review under the APA, but did not give that express right to denied purchasers, the purchaser has no rights under the APA.
Sean Caranna | Executive Director
Florida Carry, Inc.
LEONARDO LYNCH v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT – FL AG Moody’s Response by AmmoLand Shooting Sports News on Scribd
About Florida Carry
Florida Carry, Inc, is a nonprofit, non-partisan, grassroots organization dedicated to advancing the fundamental civil right of all Floridians to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Their website is www.FloridaCarry.org.
The Florida AG was Floridas youngest judge. Shes now a Republican, but was a Democrat.
Becoming Floridas top Law Enforcer seems to have gone to her head, as she is exhibiting a little Hitler syndrome by putting the FDLE-Florida Department of Law Enforcement above the law.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Moody
The guy running against her in the primary was great. Shame he didn’t win.
Thank Rick Scott and his support for voter fraud. He didn’t do anything when it was publicly known in 2016 and only acted in 2018 when the very same people threatened HIS career. At the very least this fraud cost us Caldwell as ag commissioner.
@Gentlemen, Florida Attorny General Ashley Moody’s arguments seem, on their face, overly broad and overly optimistic. Why is Fla. even second guessing the NICS, when there should not even be an NICS?
I think someone is going to make some coin over this.
@Roy, Yep, … the judge!
In California, every attorney general (AG) who has served in my lifetime is in lockstep with the govenor, not since Ronald Reagan has there been an AG that was considered trust worthy. Now that California is a one party democrat state our attorney general has shown to be a true communist because he is anti-Constitution politician. He is on record for being an enemy of the Second Amendment and against our President.
Yet, the cowardly American People allow these communists to stay in power.
98% of Americans WILL NOT stand and fight for their Rights.
Gee, the statute uses the word s “Shall issue” but it seems that not only the Constitution of the United States and the State of Florida can be ignored. The Florida AG doesn’t care. Everyone is guilty of something and they must prove at their expense that they are allowed the privilege of purchasing a firearm. Mistakes by government such as typos, similar names, are the responsibility of the citizen desiring to purchase a firearm. That means that the AG opinion is that government employees do not have to be accurate and error free. Reminds me of the U.S. Postal… Read more »
The 2nd Amendment also states “shall not infringe…”
The very definition of arbitrary and capricious. This needs to get into court, soon. You cannot deny or abridge a person’s Constitutional Rights as outlined in the Bill of Rights. Not only that, but the Florida AG is basically telling the Courts they have no right of judicial review.
SCOTUS addressed this many decades ago: You CANNOT delay or deny Constitutional Rights, require a fee or license to use Constitutional Rights and no person or group of persons may take Constitutional Rights away. They are INALIENABLE! U.S. Supreme Court, Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) When a person got out of prison, after paying his debt to society, his Rights were to be restored. Denying Constitutional Rights to past felons has been a federal rule and state laws. The SCOTUS has refused to take up this Constitutional issue. Besides, with Roberts and Kavanaugh getting in bed with the… Read more »