B.C., a Child v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledSeptember 9, 2026
Docket3D2026-1489
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed September 9, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D26-1489
Lower Tribunal No. J26-63
________________
B.C., a child,
Petitioner,
vs.
State of Florida,
Respondent.
A Case of Original Jurisdiction – Prohibition.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant
Public Defender, for petitioner.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Ryan Schelwat, Assistant
Attorney General, for respondent.
Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and LOBREE, JJ.
LOGUE, J.
B.C. petitions for a writ of prohibition challenging the denial of his
motion to dismiss, claiming immunity from prosecution under Florida’s
Stand-Your-Ground law, § 776.012(1), Fla. Stat., because he allegedly acted
in self-defense. We deny the petition.
The trial court conducted a hearing on B.C.’s motion to dismiss. B.C.
did not testify at the hearing. The only evidence presented at the hearing was
(1) the testimony of the alleged victim, who testified he was not the aggressor
and that he was attacked by B.C.; and (2) various videotapes from cameras
at the location. The alleged victim’s testimony and videotapes reflect that
B.C. became involved in an altercation outside a gas station convenience
store. B.C. was pulling his car out of its parking spot when the alleged victim
was walking between B.C.’s vehicle and another parked vehicle to enter the
store. The alleged victim slapped the passenger window or mirror of B.C.’s
car in protest of the movement of B.C.’s car. B.C. then exited his car, followed
and confronted the alleged victim, and ultimately hit him in the face and broke
his nose.
Having carefully reviewed the transcript and the videos, we find no
error in the trial court’s decision to deny B.C.’s motion to dismiss and to send
the case to trial. “[T]he trial court’s factual findings are presumed correct and
can be reversed only if they are not supported by competent substantial
evidence.” State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249, 1252 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).
2
Petition denied.
3