This article is provided for general educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal, financial, or tax advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, procedures, and agency rules can differ by jurisdiction and may change over time. A qualified professional can address specific facts and current requirements. The author and publisher are not responsible for actions taken based on this information.
Key Facts
- National overview: The ABA described a comprehensive legal analysis of the impact of stand-your-ground statutes through its National Stand Your Ground Task Force materials.
- National overview: The ABA described study questions about how racial or ethnic bias may affect the construction, application, and operation of stand-your-ground laws, including threat and immunity determinations.
- National overview: The ABA page summarizing a yearlong national study included findings described as increased homicides, no deterrent on serious crimes, racial disparities, and impeded law enforcement.
- State level: Florida Statutes § 776.013 provides that a person in a dwelling or residence where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat and may use nondeadly or deadly force under listed conditions.
- State level: Florida Statutes § 776.013 also creates statutory presumptions of reasonable fear in certain unlawful and forceful entry, removal, or occupied-vehicle situations, with exceptions listed in the statute.
- State level: Florida Statutes § 776.032 provides immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable force unless a law-enforcement-officer exception applies, and it defines “criminal prosecution” for immunity purposes.
- State level: Florida Statutes § 776.032 places the clear-and-convincing burden on the party seeking to overcome immunity after a defendant raises a prima facie claim at a pretrial immunity hearing.
- State level: In Nicol Maslo v. State of Florida, the Florida Third District denied relief because the defendant’s stand-your-ground motion failed to establish a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity.
Last reviewed: May 2026. Legal rules, forms, deadlines, and procedures can change by jurisdiction, agency, and court system.
“Stand your ground laws” are usually discussed as a bundle of statutory rules that affect when deadly or nondeadly force may be used and whether certain claims can shield a person from criminal prosecution or civil liability. Rather than treating the label as one uniform nationwide rule, the best way to understand the term is to look at the specific statutes that a state enacted and the way courts apply those statutes.
One reason the topic matters is that “stand your ground” disputes often move through multiple stages, and Florida, for example, places justification and presumptions in Fla. Stat. § 776.013 and immunity rules in Fla. Stat. § 776.032.
What the ABA task force described as its focus
The American Bar Association’s National Stand Your Ground Task Force materials describe a “comprehensive legal analysis of the impact” of stand-your-ground statutes, and the ABA also frames the work as examining how racial or ethnic bias may affect the construction, application, and operation of stand-your-ground laws (see the ABA foreword discussing the National Stand Your Ground Task Force study).
The ABA materials further describe results from a yearlong national study, and the ABA characterizes “some findings” as including that stand-your-ground laws increased homicides, had no deterrent effect on serious crimes, contributed to racial disparities in the criminal justice system, and impeded law enforcement (see the ABA Goal III Entity Research page describing yearlong study findings).
Florida example for the “stand your ground” label in statute use of force rules
Florida Statutes § 776.013 is often a key reference point in discussions of stand-your-ground concepts because it addresses a “home protection” framework, including no duty to retreat and stated conditions for nondeadly and deadly force (see Florida Statutes § 776.013).
Florida Statutes § 776.013 also includes presumptions connected to “reasonable fear” in specified circumstances, with exceptions listed in the statute.
Florida example for the stand your ground label in statute immunity rules and burdens
Florida Statutes § 776.032 explains a separate but related idea: immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action, including a law-enforcement-officer exception (see Florida Statutes § 776.032).
Florida’s immunity statute also defines how “criminal prosecution” is counted for immunity purposes, and it states that the term includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
The statute also addresses what happens procedurally after immunity is raised, including that once a defendant makes a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence shifts to the party seeking to overcome immunity.
A compact comparison of two Florida “stand your ground” statutory functions
| Florida statutory feature | Where it shows up in the statute | What it does in plain language (based on the statute text) |
|---|---|---|
| Justification and presumptions for force in a dwelling or residence | Fla. Stat. § 776.013 | Eliminates a duty to retreat for a person with a right to be in the dwelling/residence and uses statutory conditions and presumptions tied to reasonable fear. |
| Immunity from prosecution and civil action | Fla. Stat. § 776.032 | Provides immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action (subject to a law-enforcement-officer exception) and sets a burden-shifting standard after a prima facie claim. |
How a Florida appellate decision ties the statutes together at the immunity stage
Nicol Maslo v. State of Florida illustrates how Florida courts apply the immunity framework in practice, and the Third District denied the petition because Maslo’s stand-your-ground motion failed to establish a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity (see Nicol Maslo v. State of Florida (3d DCA)).
The opinion also described sequencing for an evidentiary stand-your-ground hearing: a criminal defendant must first allege a facially sufficient prima facie claim of justifiable use of force under chapter 776 before the hearing burden shifts to the State.
This linkage helps explain a common point of confusion. Discussion of stand-your-ground laws sometimes treats the label as only a substantive question about whether force was justified. Florida’s statutory structure and the Maslo opinion show that the “stand-your-ground” label can also trigger a procedural immunity threshold, including a prima facie pleading requirement and a clear-and-convincing burden shift at the pretrial immunity hearing stage. For additional context about how factfinders weigh evidence in criminal proceedings, see jury service in TheFirstFile’s archives.
