Ex-Pasco Traffic Control Officer Joseph DeSantis Accused of Chasing Teens in His Truck: When Is a Car a Deadly Weapon in Florida?

On October 15, a boy played ding-dong ditch at the Wesley Chapel home of Joseph DeSantis, 74, who was then a traffic control officer for the Pasco Sheriff’s Office, according to deputies and court documents WFLA cited. WFLA reports that the boy went home and that the two teens in the affidavit were his friends. Those two told deputies DeSantis came after them in his truck. WFLA reported that he was later arrested on two felony counts, and the Sheriff’s Office says it fired him. He told deputies he followed one boy to find his parents and wasn’t trying to hit anyone. The only weapon in WFLA’s account is the truck, which puts the case on a question the Florida Supreme Court took up in 1926: when does a vehicle count as a deadly weapon?

What WFLA Reported

WFLA’s first story, published October 21, 2026, says the Pasco Sheriff’s Office identified the man as Joseph DeSantis, 74, and said he chased a group of teenagers after a ding-dong-ditch prank at his home. A follow-up the same day, citing court documents, puts the incident at about 7 p.m. on October 15 in Wesley Chapel. In a statement WFLA quoted, the Sheriff’s Office said DeSantis “was employed by the Pasco Sheriff’s Office as a traffic control officer and was terminated following the incident.”

Most of the detail comes from the affidavit in the case, a sworn statement setting out the deputies’ account, as WFLA described it. The two teens said DeSantis “drove at and swerved toward them both, at one point driving onto the sidewalk.” One said DeSantis got out of the truck and said he’d kill him. That teen ran off and later told deputies he was scared DeSantis would hit him with the truck. The other said DeSantis kept pursuing him through the neighborhood, driving and swerving at him. According to WFLA, the affidavit also says this boy heard DeSantis yell a threat about killing him.

WFLA reports that surveillance video sent to the station, which the affidavit also cites, shows DeSantis shouting at the teens and chasing them off, then making a quick turn with screeching tires and accelerating after them. The station says a second video, from that boy’s father, shows the boy escaping onto a bike trail with the truck behind him. According to WFLA, a third video, which deputies found, shows DeSantis driving fast toward the same boy, honking, and driving up to him until the boy had to leave the road to avoid being hit. DeSantis can be heard yelling at the boy on that video while the boy yells for him to stop, WFLA says.

According to WFLA, investigators also spoke with that boy’s father, who told them he’d confronted DeSantis. Investigators said DeSantis admitted during that confrontation to threatening to kill the boy, the station reports.

DeSantis gave deputies his side, according to WFLA’s account of the affidavit. He said it was the second time in a month someone had ding-dong-ditched his house, so he drove after the teens to find them, and that he followed one boy to learn where he lived and talk to his parents. He denied trying to hit anyone. Shown the video of his truck heading toward the boy, he said he thought the boy was on the grass shoulder or the sidewalk, and again said he wasn’t trying to hit him.

The Sheriff’s Office said no one was hurt and that DeSantis had no prior arrests, according to WFLA. The station’s follow-up says he’s out on bond and that he didn’t want to comment when WFLA reached him. He hasn’t been convicted of anything. An affidavit is one side’s sworn account, and no court has found any of it true.

When a Car Is a Deadly Weapon in Florida

Florida’s aggravated assault statute, section 784.021(1), defines the crime as an assault “(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or (b) With an intent to commit a felony.” Subsection (2) makes it a felony of the third degree. The statute doesn’t define “deadly weapon,” and it doesn’t list cars, trucks or anything else. That’s been left to the courts, and they look at how the thing was used.

The rule goes back to Williamson v. State, 92 Fla. 980, 111 So. 124 (1926). The indictment charged that a Walton County man drove a Ford touring car into another man, and he was found guilty of aggravated assault. On appeal he argued that a car can’t be a deadly weapon because it wasn’t designed as one, and that the evidence didn’t show his car was used as a weapon anyway. The Florida Supreme Court disagreed. It held that “an automobile may be so used as to constitute a deadly weapon,” and that it was “competent for the jury, under the evidence in this case, to determine” whether he’d used his car that way. Id., 92 Fla. at 985.

Nearly 80 years later, the Second District Court of Appeal, which hears appeals from Pasco and Pinellas, came back to the question in Miller v. State, 918 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). A woman who’d been fired from a Pinellas County bank drove her car toward the bank’s security officer and stopped without hitting him. The trial judge told the jury that a weapon is deadly “if it is used or threatened to be used in a way likely to produce death or great bodily harm,” and then that “a motor vehicle is a deadly weapon.” The Second District reversed her conviction over a different error in the instructions. It didn’t decide whether that last line was error, but it noted that “whether a motor vehicle is used or threatened to be used in a way that makes it a deadly weapon is typically a question resolved by a jury.” Id. at 417.

In 2018, the Florida Supreme Court quoted Miller’s point about the jury in Shepard v. State, 259 So. 3d 701 (Fla. 2018), a case about a different statute, and held that “it is a question of fact for the jury to determine whether an automobile or other object was used as a weapon by the defendant.” 259 So. 3d at 707. So the label follows the use. A truck parked in a driveway doesn’t threaten anyone. Driven at a person, the same truck can be a deadly weapon, and it’s typically a jury that decides which it was.

What “Without Intent to Kill” Means

WFLA’s follow-up quotes the father of one of the teens objecting to one of the charges reading “without the intent to kill.” The phrase can read like a conclusion about what DeSantis meant to do, but it comes straight from section 784.021(1)(a), which defines this kind of aggravated assault as an assault “[w]ith a deadly weapon without intent to kill.”

In Anderson v. State, No. SC18-1059 (Fla. Mar. 5, 2020), where a man drove his truck erratically and struck his girlfriend’s car, the information repeated that language. It said he made an assault “with a motor vehicle, a deadly weapon[,] without intent to kill, contrary to [s]ection 784.021(1)(a).” Slip op. at 2. The words name the branch of the statute the charge falls under: the deadly-weapon branch in paragraph (a), as opposed to the intent-to-commit-a-felony branch in paragraph (b). The wording doesn’t record a finding by deputies about what DeSantis intended. Both branches are third-degree felonies under subsection (2).

For the deadly-weapon branch, the intent the law looks for comes from the definition of assault itself. Section 784.011(1) defines an assault as “an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.” A well-founded fear is one the circumstances support, and imminent means about to happen. The instruction the jury heard in Miller broke that into four things the State had to prove: an intentional and unlawful threat to do violence, an apparent ability to carry it out, a well-founded fear that violence was about to take place, and an assault made with a deadly weapon. Whether the driver meant to kill wasn’t one of them.

What Happens Next on a Felony Charge in Pasco

The charges at arrest are the deputies’ charges, and they aren’t necessarily the ones that get filed. Under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.140(a)(2), prosecution in circuit court is “solely by indictment or information.” An indictment comes from a grand jury, and an information is the formal charging document a prosecutor files. In Pasco, that prosecutor is the State Attorney for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, which covers Pasco and Pinellas, and it’s that office that decides what to file. The Florida Supreme Court has said that “the state attorney has complete discretion in deciding whether and how to prosecute.” Anderson, slip op. at 7 (quoting State v. Bloom, 497 So. 2d 2, 3 (Fla. 1986)).

Rule 3.140(g) requires the state attorney or a designated assistant to sign a felony information under oath, stating good faith in bringing the prosecution and certifying that he or she “has received testimony under oath from the material witness or witnesses for the offense.” In plain terms, before a felony information can be filed, a prosecutor has to swear to having received sworn accounts from the witnesses the charge depends on. Under Rule 3.140(d)(1), each count also has to “allege the essential facts constituting the offense charged” and cite the statute it relies on.

A felony goes to circuit court, and for a Wesley Chapel case that means the Robert D. Sumner Judicial Center in Dade City, where East Pasco criminal cases are heard. The firm’s Dade City courthouse guide covers it, though it’s the address on the court notice that counts.

Section 775.082(3)(e) caps the prison term for a third-degree felony at 5 years, and section 775.083(1)(c) caps the fine at $5,000. They’re the ordinary maximums for a third-degree felony, which is what each count at arrest is, and they don’t predict what happens in any case.

The Questions a Defense Lawyer Asks

WFLA described what three videos show, and a defense lawyer would want the original files, full length, with the camera locations and timestamps. Distance, speed and where the boy was all bear on whether the truck was used “in a way likely to produce death or great bodily harm,” the definition the Miller jury heard. DeSantis told deputies he thought the boy was on the grass shoulder or the sidewalk, and that’s what the footage tests.

There are two counts, and WFLA’s account of the affidavit describes two teens without naming either one. Both said DeSantis drove at and swerved toward them. One also said DeSantis got out of the truck before saying he’d kill him, so it matters which act the State relies on for that count: the driving, or the threat made on foot. If the information doesn’t say enough, Rule 3.140(n) lets the defense ask the court to order a statement of particulars, a written answer from the prosecutor on the specific facts behind a charge. The Florida Supreme Court has said that asking is the defense’s job: “the responsibility for detail and particularity in the charging document rests on the defendant and not the State.” Anderson, slip op. at 15.

In Miller, the Second District wrote that “[a]ggravated assault requires that the person who is threatened experience the fear that violence is imminent.” 918 So. 2d at 417. That’s why it reversed: the instruction let the jury convict if one person was threatened and a different person was afraid. Here, one teen told deputies he was scared he’d be hit, and WFLA’s account has the other boy leaving the road to avoid being hit and escaping onto a bike trail with the truck behind him. For each count, the State has to prove that the person threatened was the one who felt that fear.

DeSantis told deputies he followed one boy to find out where he lived and talk to his parents. Following someone isn’t an assault by itself, since section 784.011(1) requires an intentional, unlawful threat to do violence. The videos, the teens’ accounts and his own statements all go to which this was. WFLA says the affidavit reports that the boy heard DeSantis yell a threat about killing him. It also reports that investigators said DeSantis admitted the threat during the father’s confrontation with him. WFLA doesn’t say who told investigators about that admission, and it says DeSantis can be heard yelling on the third video without saying what he yelled. What exactly was said, when it was said, and whether any recording captures it are the questions a defense lawyer would press.

The driver in Anderson asked the trial judge to let the jury consider reckless driving as a lesser offense, meaning a less serious crime the jury can choose instead of the one charged. Section 316.192(1)(a) defines reckless driving as driving “in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property,” and that definition doesn’t contain a threat. The judge refused, and the Florida Supreme Court agreed, holding that a defendant isn’t entitled to that instruction where the charging document “fails to expressly allege the element of driving.” Slip op. at 16. Anderson’s information said he made an assault “with a motor vehicle,” and the court wouldn’t read driving into those words. The same opinion puts the job of asking for more detail on the defense, through the statement of particulars, so the exact words of an information matter from the day it’s filed.

The firm’s page on assault and battery in Florida covers the full ladder from a threat to aggravated battery, the violent crime defense overview covers bond and self-defense in these cases, and the Pasco County criminal defense page covers how cases move through the Sixth Circuit.

Common Questions

Can a car be a deadly weapon in Florida?

Yes, depending on how it’s used. In Williamson v. State, 92 Fla. 980, 985, 111 So. 124 (1926), the Florida Supreme Court held that “an automobile may be so used as to constitute a deadly weapon.” In Miller v. State, 918 So. 2d 415, 417 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), the Second District noted that whether a vehicle was used that way “is typically a question resolved by a jury.”

What does “without intent to kill” mean on an aggravated assault charge?

It’s the statute’s own wording. Section 784.021(1)(a) defines one kind of aggravated assault as an assault “[w]ith a deadly weapon without intent to kill,” and charging documents repeat that language to name the branch of the statute, without any finding about what the accused person intended.

Is aggravated assault a felony in Florida?

Yes. Ordinarily it’s a third-degree felony under section 784.021(2), with a maximum of 5 years in prison under section 775.082(3)(e) and a $5,000 fine under section 775.083(1)(c). When the person threatened is 65 or older, section 784.08(2)(b) raises it to a second-degree felony, and section 784.07(2)(c) does the same for a knowing assault on a law enforcement officer performing official duties.

Does the State have to prove the car hit someone?

No. An assault is a threat, and the definition in section 784.011(1) doesn’t require contact. In Miller, the charge was aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and the driver had stopped without hitting anyone.

Who decides whether Joseph DeSantis is formally charged?

The State Attorney for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, which covers Pasco and Pinellas. Under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.140, a felony is prosecuted in circuit court by information or indictment, and it’s the prosecutor who decides whether to file and what to charge.

Further Reading

1. Ex-Pasco Sheriff’s Office employee accused of threatening, chasing teens with truck, WFLA, October 21, 2026
2. Father confronts ex-Pasco traffic control officer accused of chasing, threatening son, WFLA, October 21, 2026
3. Fla. Stat. 784.021, aggravated assault, Florida Senate
4. Fla. Stat. 784.011, assault, Florida Senate
5. Fla. Stat. 784.07, assault or battery on law enforcement officers and others, Florida Senate
6. Fla. Stat. 784.08, assault or battery on persons 65 or older, Florida Senate
7. Fla. Stat. 775.082, penalties, Florida Senate
8. Fla. Stat. 775.083, fines, Florida Senate
9. Fla. Stat. 316.192, reckless driving, Florida Senate
10. Williamson v. State, 92 Fla. 980, 111 So. 124 (1926)
11. Miller v. State, 918 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
12. Shepard v. State, 259 So. 3d 701 (Fla. 2018)
13. Anderson v. State, No. SC18-1059 (Fla. Mar. 5, 2020)

This post is general information about Florida law, not legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. The authorities discussed are sections 26.021(6), 35.03, 316.192(1)(a), 775.082(3)(e), 775.083(1)(c), 784.011, 784.021, 784.07(2)(c) and 784.08(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2026); Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.140; Williamson v. State, 92 Fla. 980, 111 So. 124 (1926); Miller v. State, 918 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Shepard v. State, 259 So. 3d 701 (Fla. 2018); Anderson v. State, No. SC18-1059 (Fla. Mar. 5, 2020); and State v. Bloom, 497 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1986), as quoted in Anderson, as of October 25, 2026. Facts about the arrest come from WFLA’s reporting and the Pasco Sheriff’s Office statements it quotes. Joseph DeSantis is presumed innocent, and the State has to prove any charge it files.