Replies

The Ammoland title is grossly misleading, at best. The source Florida Today article of November 8, 2019 is more accurately titled, "Stand your ground immunity denial overturned in 2015 Brevard deputy shooting case." There is no Court finding of upholding "Right of Armed Citizen to Shoot a Police Officer in Defense." It was conceded by DeRossett that, had he known the cops were law enforcement officers, he would not have had a claim to immunity under the Castle Doctrine.

In the November 7, 2019 opinion regarding whether the trial court had properly considered DeRossett's pleading of self-defence under the Castle Doctrine, the Florida Court of Appeals for the Fifth District found that the trial court improperly shifted the burden of proof and that it must reconsider the Castle Doctrine. It further found that the trial court must find that DeRossett knew, or should have known, at the time he fired his warning shot that he was shooting at law enforcement officers, or that DeRossett was using his home to further criminal activity, or else grant DeRossett's motion and discharge him from the crimes charged.

DeRossett conceded that a person is not entitled to immunity from prosecution under section 776.032(1) for knowingly shooting at law enforcement officers.

The issue of whether DeRossett knowingly fired at law enforcement officers was initally not properly considered by the trial court. On remand, the trial court found a lack of proof to sustain that exemption from the Castle Doctrine.

In the rehearing, the trial court found DeRossett did not know the cops were law enforcement officers. The issue of knowingly firing at police officers was not before the appellate court in 2020.

The appellate court opinion of April 15, 2020 overturned the trial court finding denying Castle Doctrine immunity due to an exception for furthering criminal activity, which finding alleged only that DeRossett had merely known of his niece's prostitution activity, without more. The appellate court found that to be insufficient evidence, as a matter of law, to support the allegation of "furthering" criminal activity. Therefore, the finding of an exemption from the Castle Doctrine failed.

DeRossett v Florida, FL App 5th Dist 5D19-0802 (7 Nov 2019)

DeRossett v Florida, FL App 5th Dist 5D19-0802 (15 Apr 2020)

The fact is DeRossett shot a police officer, legally, under self defense doctrine, and the Stand Your Ground rule.

The local court refused to apply the immunity which was required by law.

The appeals court required the local court to apply the immunity.

That, de facto, upheld the right of the DeRossett to shot the police officer (deputy) in self defense.

Just because the appeals court did not state exactly that, in so many words, does not change the reality of the case.