Gulley v. State
The First District affirmed Gulley's conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, relying on its prior decision in Edenfield v. State rejecting the argument that Florida's felon-in-possession statute is unconstitutional under Bruen. Two concurring opinions debate whether Bruen's historical-tradition analysis even applies to felons, with Judge Tanenbaum arguing the Supreme Court has already limited Second Amendment protection to 'law-abiding citizens' and Judge Bilbrey cautioning that the issue remains unsettled given contrary reasoning in the Third Circuit's Range decision and a Fifth DCA concurrence.
Key facts
- Gulley was convicted in trial court of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon under Florida Statute § 790.23(1)(a).
- Gulley appealed his conviction, arguing that Florida's felon-in-possession statute violates the Second Amendment under the framework established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
While the panel's disposition simply follows existing circuit precedent (Edenfield) upholding Florida's felon-in-possession statute against Second Amendment/Bruen challenges, the concurrences are useful for… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.