.png){kind=spacer}
FAIL/REFUSE TO PRESENT MARIJUANA USE REGISTRY ID CARD;
CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE / EXPOSURE TO HARM
CASE DISMISSED/NOLLE PROSEQUI
Santa Rosa County, FL
30 de abril de 2025
This was a hard, high-stakes Santa Rosa County matter that began on Navarre Beach at the Sea Oat Pavilion (8755 Sea Oat Cir.), where deputies responded to reports of a male screaming about religion and sexually explicit topics and acting aggressively around families and children. The reporting deputy on the scene was LE Deputy J. Nelson (ID 1708); the booking/processing paperwork shows deputies Jason Anthony Grammer, Jeremy Ryan Odom, and James Allen Hazelwood were involved in the post-arrest processing. The arrest report and booking paperwork are part of the public record. According to the report, Mr. Ridenour — a young man who was not in his right mind at the time of contact and who told deputies he “was high” — was pacing on the beach, behaving nonsensically, and allegedly approached and aggressively screamed at bystanders (one complainant reported Mr. Ridenour ran at him and his newborn and threw a water bottle at the baby’s feet). Deputies located a black backpack containing the client’s wallet and a medical-marijuana container on the beach; when officers collected his property they found a loaded Glock .33 sitting unsecured on his beach towel in plain view while multiple families and juveniles were in close proximity. The report notes body-worn camera (BWC) was available for the event. The State charged Mr. Ridenour with unsafe storage of a firearm (F.S. § 790.174), failure/refusal to present a medical marijuana registry ID card (F.S. § 381.986(12)(e)1), and culpable negligence / exposure to harm (F.S. § 784.05(1)) — misdemeanor-level exposures that nevertheless carry real consequences (including the possibility of county jail, fines, and serious collateral effects)
What we did and why the result is meaningful: from the outset we treated this as a case that required both rigorous factual development and humane, contextual mitigation. We preserved and reviewed BWC and scene evidence, subpoenaed the full deputy reports, and obtained booking and witness materials that showed the client was in a severely altered mental state at the scene. We developed medical and behavioral context that explained why Mr. Ridenour was acting as he was, emphasized the absence of any intent to endanger children or the public, and attacked the State’s ability to prove criminal mens rea under the culpable-negligence theory.
Critically, we refused to accept the prosecutor’s repeated contentions that conviction was a foregone conclusion. We continuously set the case for trial — repeatedly pushing for a trial setting despite multiple prosecution continuances — so the State could not hide behind delay. That trial-ready posture forced the State to confront the evidentiary and credibility problems our team had identified; even after representing it was “ready for trial” on multiple occasions, the Office of the State Attorney filed a NOLLE PROSEQUI and dismissed the case the morning of jury selection.
Why this result matters: the dismissal removed the risk of incarceration, fines, and the life-altering collateral consequences of a conviction (employment, housing, licensing, and other downstream harms). It also vindicated a two-track defense approach — meticulous evidence work to expose the State’s weaknesses and relentless litigation posture to force a real choice — and protected a young man who was plainly not well at the time of the incident.
(Public arrest report and booking documents cited above. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes; this summary is general information, not legal advice.)