The State Attorney of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit of Florida has ruled that there will be no prosecution of the woman who shot a man to death following a dispute over a parking space at a Wal-Mart in June. https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/north-lauderdale-self-defense-walmart-shooting-stand-your-ground/

A lengthy and detailed STAND YOUR GROUND IMMUNITY MEMO was released to explain the legal reasons for this decision. https://browardsao.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Homicide-Unit-Memo-re-June-30-2026.pdf

In summary,

“The video does not demonstrate that MP was in the right, rather it demonstrates that the State of Florida cannot overcome her claim that she was in reasonable fear of great bodily harm by clear and convincing evidence. Florida is a Stand Your Ground State. MP did not have to wait to be attacked before resorting to deadly force. She did not have to retreat as long as her fear was reasonable and no evidence has been presented to disprove that.”

A video timeline has also been posted by the State Attorney. https://browardsao.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Timeline-6-30-26.mp4

Reading the Memo and watching the video gave me a much different opinion of her retreat around the vehicles than I had previously. There was a much greater distance covered than just moving to the back of her vehicle. Given that she was neither a spring chicken nor a petite flower, she may well have retreated as much as she was physically capable of.

Prior to the release of the Memo, several persons had opined that because she exited her car with her pistol in hand she had committed an Aggravated Assault on DG (Dead Guy) and therefore had a Duty to Retreat. This issue is specifically addressed by a footnote in the Memo.

“If one argues that when MP exited her vehicle she committed the crime of Aggravated Assault with a Firearm, the State would point to §776.031 of the Florida Statutes which allows non-deadly force to be used in defense of property. As MP was clearly concerned about BD’s threats to damage her vehicle, this conduct was not unlawful. See, Little v. State, 302 So. 3d 396, (Fla. 4th DCA 2020).”

Note that displaying a weapon is non-deadly force as a matter of law in the State of Florida. This is not true everywhere so concealed carriers should be aware of the law wherever they happen to be. Legal nuances can be complicated, as this case clearly shows.

I still believe that the situation could have been handled differently in the context of CAN-MAY-MUST-SHOULD https://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=19028. However, my opinion has been tempered greatly by the depth of information in the Close Out Memo by the State Attorney. As is sometimes the case, the SHOULD in an incident can be decided differently, as defined by a person’s personal beliefs and capabilities.

For those who are interested, I will have more commentary on my Patreon page in the next few days.

https://www.patreon.com/TacticalProfessor