Lynch v. Fla. Dep't of Law Enf't
| Decision Date | 01 December 2021 |
| Docket Number | 1D19-4217 |
| Parties | Leonardo Lynch, Appellant, v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
On appeal from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
Eric J. Friday of Kingry &Friday, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Bilal Ahmed Faruqui, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee; Joseph S. White Assistant General Counsel, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Mr Lynch challenges the Florida Department of Law Enforcement's (FDLE) determination that he was prohibited from purchasing a firearm. After examining federal and state law as well as the record, we conclude FDLE erred. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Mr Lynch attempted to purchase a firearm from a federal firearm licensee (FFL). The sale of firearms is regulated by state and federal law. 18 U.S.C. § 922; § 790.065, Fla Stat. (2018). Before completing the sale of a firearm, federal law requires an FFL to conduct a background check of the purchaser. 18 U.S.C. § 992(t). The federal background check requires the FFL to contact the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to determine whether it is unlawful for the person to receive the firearm under federal or state law. 18 U.S.C. § 922(t)(1)(A). A person cannot receive a firearm if he: has been found to be the unlawful user of a controlled substance, has been found to be addicted to a controlled substance, has been adjudicated mentally defective, or has been committed to a mental institution. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3)-(4). The FFL cannot sell a person a firearm, without the risk of fines, suspension, or loss of its license, unless the NICS system provides the FFL with a unique identification number that authorizes the sale. 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(t)(1)(A)-(B)(i), 922(t)(5). However, when an FFL is located in a state that has a governmental point-of-contact (POC), the FFL does not directly contact the NICS; instead, the POC takes care of contacting the NICS system. Mance v. Sessions, 896 F.3d 669, 707 (5th Cir. 2018). The Legislature designated FDLE as the POC for FFLs in Florida. § 790.065, Fla. Stat. (2018).
When FDLE receives a request for a background check from an FFL, it is required to contact the NICS system on behalf of the FFL based on federal and state law. § 790.065(1)(a)3., Fla. Stat. (2018). The Legislature also required FDLE to conduct a check of the information contained in the Florida Crime Information Center (FCIC) and the National Crime Information Center (NCIC). Id. After conducting checks in those systems, FDLE is required to review the information it receives from the systems as well as any other information it has available to determine whether the person is prohibited under federal and state law from receiving a firearm. § 790.065(2), Fla. Stat. (2018). After reviewing all the available records, FDLE must inform the FFL whether the records indicate the person is prohibited from receiving a firearm, and if so, FDLE must provide the FFL with a nonapproval number. § 790.065(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018). If the records indicate the person is not prohibited, then FDLE is required to give the FFL a unique approval number. Id.
With these legislative mandates in mind, we turn to the facts of this case. Before Mr. Lynch's firearm purchase was completed, the FFL requested FDLE to conduct the required background check. Upon receiving the information, FDLE reviewed the records. Because the records it received indicated Mr. Lynch was a prohibited person, FDLE provided the FFL with a nonapproval number.
Upon learning that FDLE had given the FFL a nonapproval number Mr. Lynch sought to appeal his nonapproval in accordance with Florida Administrative Code Rule 11C-6.009(8). Upon receiving Mr. Lynch's appeal, FDLE wrote him a letter informing him of the reason why he was not approved. The NICS system indicated Mr. Lynch was prohibited from receiving a firearm in accordance with Title 18 United States Code section 992(t)(4).[*] Mr. Lynch was prohibited from receiving a firearm based on mental incompetency records or a court-ordered substance abuse treatment record. If he believed he was not the subject of the record(s), he would need to contact the owner of the record(s) in New York. The letter included the contact information for the owner of the record(s). It also informed him that if he was the subject of the record, but believed he should be relieved of the collateral consequences of the record(s), he would still need to contact the owner of the record to determine the process he needed to follow to be relieved of those consequences. FDLE informed Mr....
To continue reading
Request your trial