Jesse Scheckner
After hearing impassioned arguments over its potential negative impacts, Ormond Beach Republican Sen. Tom Leek has postponed a floor vote on his bill to enhance penalties for people found guilty of killing a police officer.
Leek and Jacksonville Republican Rep. Jessica Baker have argued for weeks that their companion bills (SB 234, HB 175) afford cops no additional room to misuse their authority.
They’ve said the legislation is instead meant to ensure that debate about the lawfulness of an arrest or detainment takes place in a courtroom, not on the street where it sometimes leads to lethal results.
But contention that the legislation’s removal of a requirement that officers act in “good faith” when arresting or detaining people has persisted, with detractors contending it will embolden bad actors and suppress historically marginalized communities.
That contention came to a head Wednesday before a planned vote on SB 234, with several Black lawmakers pushing back against the bill. Leek heard them and temporarily pulled the measure from consideration.
“My love for you all tells me today that the best thing for us to do is to keep talking, to continue the discussion (and) try to do the best that we can to make everybody comfortable that the policy we pass is good policy,” he said.
SB 234, if passed in its current form, would require defendants convicted of manslaughter in cases involving the death of a police officer to receive life sentences without parole. The legislation is named for Daytona Beach Police Officer Jason Rayner, who was fatally shot in 2021.
Prosecutors sought a first-degree murder charge against Rayner’s killer, Othal Wallace, who resisted lawful detainment by Rayner, forced a physical confrontation and in less than 30 seconds pulled a gun and shot the officer in the head. Jurors instead found Wallace guilty of a lesser manslaughter charge, which carries a maximum 30-year prison sentence when the crime involves a firearm.
Community outrage followed Wallace’s sentencing. So did bills last year from Fort Myers Republican Sen. Jonathan Martin and Baker, both former Assistant State Attorneys, neither of which succeeded.
SB 234 and HB 175 would add manslaughter to the list of crimes — including first- and second-degree murder, and attempted murder — against a police officer for which the mandatory minimum sentence is life imprisonment without parole.
It would also eliminate statutory language to clarify that a person cannot resist an officer with violence or the threat of violence when the officer is performing his or her official duties.
That change is necessary, Baker said, because “jurors can get confused” when interpreting the relevant statutes as they’re currently listed, and defendants have used that confusion to their advantage.
But the legislation’s removal of a “good faith” standard for officers has been a persistent sticking point. Miami Gardens Democratic Sen. Shevrin Jones explained why Wednesday while proffering an amendment, which his GOP colleagues shot down, that would have kept that language in the law.
“If there is a factual question about good faith, the jury should be able to ask and engage (on) it. That’s what our system does, trust a jury to make sometimes difficult calls,” he said. “In Black communities, this (bill) does not and will not play out (the way you think it will).”
Several of Jones’ Black Caucus colleagues concurred. St. Augustine Democratic Sen. Darryl Rouson, who made history as Pinellas County’s first Black prosecutor, spoke of how he taught his sons to be submissive during police interactions because “if you resist, you might die.”
Requiring good faith from police officers, he said, “doesn’t seem like a whole lot to ask” in return.
Rosalind Osgood, a Tamarac Democrat, voted for SB 234 twice during the committee process, but had a change of heart after speaking with Black police officers, community members and reflecting on her own uneasy interactions with law enforcement.
She spoke of the police killing of George Floyd in May 2020 that sparked nationwide protests and calls for police reforms and how, even as people witnessed and filmed the incident, no one intervened.
“Law enforcement officer can do their jobs … but they can’t just do what they want to do, and a lot of times in our community we have law enforcement officers that handled us in a way that’s not of justice (and) that I know most of you in this room would not approve of,” she said. “We’re (not) saying all White police officers are bad or we’re making ourselves the victims. What we’re trying to express to you is the reality of what we live with every day.”
Hollywood Democratic Sen. Jason Pizzo, a former prosecutor and the current leader of Senate Democrats, said SB 234 undermines the “gatekeeping function” of the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unlawful searches and seizures. But as it’s written, it would also disincentivize defendants from pleading guilty because of the heightened mandatory minimum.
“This is a bill that basically addresses how upset we are that a jury found a lesser (sentence). This is, ‘How do we get justice (and) closure for our family because a prosecutor didn’t do a good enough job to get a higher charge,’” he said. “If the prosecutor had gotten second-degree murder, there would not be an SB 234.”
In what initiated the most heated exchange on the floor Wednesday, Martin talked of how “many people disrespected law enforcement but at the same time would demand that law enforcement would keep their community safe.” He attributed that disconnect to “televised controversy, where someone says they were innocent and were profiled,” but that the officers in question were acting on material evidence — a vehicle description, for instance — that prompted the interaction.
“We cannot let the lies in the media that amp us up … ruin our communities, and this bill gets to the heart of that issue,” he said, adding that nonviolent resistance such as walking away when a cop tells you to stop would still be lawful. “If the law enforcement officer doesn’t have a right to detain you, you have a right to run away. But under no circumstance do you have a right to fight that officer (or) resist with violence.”
Jones, his voice raised, told Martin racial profiling and implicit bias are “not a myth.” Martin denied saying any such thing.
“It may not be in your community,” Jones said. “You’ve got five Black members who are sitting in this room, so don’t say racial profiling is not real, because it is, sir.”
Before pulling the bill, Leek tried to lower the temperature in the room.
“There’s no one in this chamber who believes racial profiling doesn’t exist,” he said. “We know it happens.”
Organizations supporting the “Officer Jason Rainer Act” include the Florida Sheriffs Association, Florida Police Chiefs Association, Florida Smart Justice Alliance, Gun Owners of America, Florida State Fraternal Order of Police, Florida Police Benevolent Association, Volusia County Sheriff’s Office, Orange County Sheriff’s Office and Sun Coast Police Benevolent Association.
Aaron Wayt of the Florida Association of Defense Attorneys said Floridians today have “multiple defenses” against excessive, unwarranted force by a police officer, and key to those defenses are the “good faith” and “legal duties” standards.
“If we don’t agree that officers should be acting in good faith,” he said, “that’s the sound of the canary in the coal mine.”
