Legal Research and Writing II Final Exam
Analyze the following problem and, using the attached case and statute, complete two tasks:
- Draft question(s) presented and
- Provide an opinion about the outcome of Ms. Jamison’s case.
The questions presented must be in the proper format (as though they would be included in a legal memorandum).
On February 4, 2020 at 10:00 p.m. Bella Jamison was stopped by Officer Chandler for failing to signal when changing lanes; the stop was conducted in Pine Cove, Florida. During the traffic stop, Officer Chandler used his flashlight to illuminate the interior of Ms. Jamison’s car. He saw a short wooden bat on the front passenger seat. Officer Chandler ordered Ms. Jamison to exit her car and seized the bat. He then arrested her for carrying a concealed weapon; Officer Chandler identified the weapon as a “billie club.”
Ms. Jamison admitted that she kept the bat in her car for self-protection but denied it was a “billie club” specifically designed for protection. Ms. Jamison has hired Kelly Norton to represent her and the trial begins next week. Ms. Norton believes that Ms. Jamison will not be convicted of carrying a concealed weapon because the small bat is not one of the weapons defined in Florida Statutes § 790.01 (2020). Will Ms. Jamison be convicted of carrying a concealed weapon?
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendant (Ms. Jamison) will be successfully convicted of carrying a concealed weapon?
- Whether the short wooden bat seized by the Officer was a weapon defined in Florida Statutes § 790.01 (2020)?
Opinion about the Outcome of Ms. Jamison’s Case
According to M.D. v. State, 873 So. 2d 525 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004) and the 2020 Florida Statues § 790.01, Ms. Jamison will not be convicted of carrying a concealed weapon because the short wooden bat seized by Officer Chandler is not one of the weapons defined in Florida Statutes § 790.01 (2020). In M.D. v. State, 873 So. 2d 525 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004), Officer Francisco Ortiz stopped M.D.’s car for speeding. Believing that M.D. *526 might have been driving under the influence, the officer asked him to step out of the car. The officer then observed a 1.5 food long “small wooden bat” wedged into the floor crevice between the driver’s door and the driver’s seat. At no time during the traffic stop did M.D. hold or wield the bat. At trial, the officers who testified characterized the bat as a “small wooden bat,” “small little bat,” “billy stick,” “billy bat,” and a “billy club.”
In M.D. v. State, 873 So. 2d 525 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004), the issue was whether the small bat was a weapon within the meaning of section 790.01(1). As it is used in Chapter 790 of Florida Statutes, the term “weapon” means any dirk, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon except a firearm or a common pocketknife. Under the Florida Statutes § 790.01, the small bat did not qualify as a “deadly weapon” because there was no evidence that t was normally dangerous or deadly when used in its ordinary and usual manner. Under M.D. v. State, 873 So. 2d 525 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004), the Circuit Court convicted the Juvenile of carrying a concealed weapon but he appealed. The DCA reversed holding that wooden bat, found in juvenile’s vehicle, was not deadly weapon, as would support conviction for carrying concealed weapon, and that wooden bat was not “billie” as would support conviction for carrying concealed weapon.
Similarly, in Ms. Jamison’s case, the defendant will not be convicted of carrying a concealed weapon because the short wooden bat seized by Officer Chandler is not one of the weapons defined in Florida Statutes § 790.01 (2020). In reference to the circumstances surrounding Ms. Jamison’s case, the bat she was carrying falls under the exceptions of Florida Statutes § 790.01 as this statute allows people to carry a concealed weapon for purposes of lawful self-defense.