Major Florida Court Grants “Stand Your Ground” Immunity in Father-Son Battery Case

October 9, 2025 Don Pumphrey, Jr. Criminal Defense, Violent Crimes Social Share

A new ruling from a top Florida court provides additional insight into when immunity from prosecution is warranted when a defendant invokes Stand Your Ground.

Stand Your Ground is one of Florida’s most widely discussed laws, but is not well understood.

Florida’s Stand Your Ground law allows someone to use or threaten to use force, including deadly force, in self-defense, defense of others, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. However, this must be reasonable and proportional to the threat faced.

If someone is charged with a crime in Florida stemming from a use or threatened use of force (deadly or nondeadly), they may file a motion to dismiss pursuant to Stand Your Ground. This entitles them to a pretrial immunity hearing. At that hearing, the judge will decide if the case may proceed to trial, or if the charges must be dismissed before trial.

At the pretrial immunity hearing, a defendant must first present a prima facie case of lawful use of force. The defendant must allege specific, uncontested facts supporting their immunity claim. 

Once the defendant makes this prima facie (on its face) showing, the State must prove the use of force was not protected by Stand Your Ground (unlawful) by clear and convincing evidence. If the State fails to disprove the defendant’s prima facie Stand Your Ground claim, the charges against the defendant must be dismissed.

Note: Unlike the “Castle Doctrine,” Stand Your Ground imposes no duty to retreat. If someone is legally present in a location and not engaged in criminal activity, they do not have to try to flee  before reasonably and proportionally using or threatening to use force. Little v. State, 111 So.3d 214 (Fla. 2d. DCA 2013)

Since Stand Your Ground was passed, Florida’s courts have heard many cases regarding whether a defendant is entitled to pretrial immunity from prosecution due to their use (or threatened use) of force being lawful. One such case recently decided by a top Florida court is Diamond v. State, 6D2025-1683 (Fla. 6th DCA, October 3, 2025).

Major New Case: Diamond v. State (Fla. 6th District Court of Appeal, October 3, 2025)

In Diamond, the defendant (Diamond) was charged with battery on an elderly person (his father), a third-degree felony under Florida law. This stemmed from a fight Diamond had with his father in the garage of their home, during which Diamond pushed him. Diamond moved to dismiss the charge, claiming his use of force was protected by Stand Your Ground. 

According to the father’s testimony at Diamond’s pretrial immunity hearing, Diamond had been living with him and allegedly attacked family members before (but never his father). Wanting to force Diamond out of the house after an argument, Diamond’s father armed himself with a knife, went to Diamond’s room, and told him to come out. 

Once Diamond did, his father explained that he wished to confront him – but not in that spot. Both Diamond and his father (the alleged victim) walked to the garage.

While in the garage, Diamond’s father continued to hold the knife, screaming and yelling at Diamond. Diamond did not yell back, but his father nevertheless pointed the knife at Diamond and “threatened” him. Though his father claimed at the hearing that he never threatened to kill Diamond, he previously testified in a deposition that he did do so.

As he was three to four feet away from Diamond at the time he raised the knife, Diamond grew scared and tried to push his father away. Diamond’s father testified that Diamond had “brushed his arms.” Whether Diamond was ever cut by the blade was disputed at the hearing. Diamond’s father said he did not want his son charged.

The trial court (judge) denied Diamond’s claim of immunity, noting that he found only certain aspects of the father’s testimony credible. The judge observed that the father did not remember “some of the things” about the incident – and concluded that Diamond did not lawfully use force against his father.

But Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and dismissed the battery charge against Diamond. It noted that Diamond had alleged a prima facie case of lawful use of force, as pushing his father away would have been a reasonable and proportional reaction to the threat of a knife (the presence and use of which was undisputed).

The 6th DCA further found the State “failed to meet its burden” (clear and convincing evidence) at the pretrial immunity hearing, because it did not introduce anything refuting the suggestion that Diamond reasonably used force in self-defense. 

The court observed that the trial judge believed the father’s explanation of what occurred in the garage was not particularly credible and potentially unreliable – which should have actually helped Diamond’s case, not hurt him. The 6th DCA wrote: 

“If Diamond had the burden of proof below, the absence of competent testimony about the physical confrontation at the heart of this case would not matter. But the State had to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Diamond was not entitled to immunity. Our record contains no competent, substantial evidence supporting the trial court’s legal conclusion that Diamond did not act in self-defense.”

“The trial court thus erred when it ruled that the State met its burden to overcome Diamond’s self-defense claim. ‘Because the State failed to meet its burden, [Diamond’s] prima facie claim of self-defense stands, and he is immune from further prosecution.’”

Essentially, the 6th DCA found the trial judge misapplied the burden of proof. After Diamond raised his prima facie claim of immunity (based on his father wielding a knife in the garage), the lack of evidence regarding other details should have led to the dismissal of the charges. 

Because the trial court effectively told Diamond that it was his job to prove his use of force was lawful, the 6th DCA reversed the ruling. That burden, the 6th DCA reminded readers, is squarely on the State. 

It is worth noting that under the pre-2017 version of Stand Your Ground, it is far less likely that the 6th DCA would have ruled for Diamond. It used to be the case that at a Stand Your Ground pretrial immunity hearing, the defendant had to prove their use of force was reasonable and proportional by a preponderance (majority) of the evidence.

However, this was updated nearly a decade ago. Now, once a defendant introduces specific facts that indicate their use of force was protected by Stand Your Ground (as was done here), the State must refute this. By clear and convincing evidence, the State must show the use or threatened use of force was not reasonable and not proportional (no protection under Stand Your Ground).

In sum, the 6th District Court of Appeal’s Diamond opinion provides an interesting new case study into how the Stand Your Ground law is applied in Florida’s courts. Diamond makes it clear: if the undisputed facts neither prove nor disprove lawful use of force, the State loses. 

Knowing about the Stand Your Ground law in Florida is crucial when evaluating whether this is a potentially viable defense in response to a criminal charge. If someone is arrested and formally charged in Florida and wishes to assert a Stand Your Ground defense, it is vital to find experienced and aggressive legal representation as soon as possible. 

Criminal Defense Attorney in Tallahassee, FL

Don Pumphrey, Jr. is a Former Prosecutor, Former State Police Officer, Lifetime Member of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; for over 25 years as a private defense attorney who is Trusted, Experienced, Aggressive in Criminal Defense as a Trial Attorney, Criminal Lawyer, Criminal Defense Lawyer for the accused in Florida State Courts located in Tallahassee, Florida but handling cases throughout the State of Florida.

Don Pumphrey, Jr. and the Tallahassee criminal defense lawyers at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting drug charges on behalf of clients and winning. Call Pumphrey Law now at (850) 681-7777 to learn more about what we can do for you. Our lawyers will be happy to provide you with a free consultation.

  Social Share