Snapchat. Photo: dennizn/Shutterstock.com

A social media post one South Florida defendant claims was just a tone-deaf joke has followed him all the way to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which declined to dismiss criminal charges against him for written threats to kill or do bodily injury.

"On my way! School shooter," 19-year-old David Puy captioned a photo of himself before posting it on Snapchat in May 2018.

It was a post he'd come to regret.

Puy, a former student at Spanish River Community High School in Boca Raton, was arrested about 15 hours later, after a student at the school reported the post to a teacher.

His case demonstrates how social media posts can have dire consequences under Florida law.

Puy was charged with violating Florida Statute Section 836.10, which governs defamation, libel and threatening messages. The statute was amended in March 2018 after a teenager posted on Twitter, "Can't wait to shoot up my school" and "School getting shot up on a Tuesday," making it a second-degree felony to post threats of violence, even if they're not directed at a particular person.

The defendant argued he "wasn't thinking," and that he never intended to shoot anyone, having written the post on his way to a restaurant to eat with friends. His West Palm Beach attorney Gregory Salnick of the Law Offices of Salnick & Fuchs claimed the post was vague enough to result in different interpretations, and presented evidence that the term "school shooter" was a frequently used as an "inappropriate joke" at high school.

Puy pleaded nolo contendere on the condition that he could appeal for dismissal. He was sentenced to three years probation in March 2019, according to online case files.

Puy moved to dismiss under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4), which says defendants can have a case thrown out if there are "no material disputed facts" left to decipher, and if no prima facie case guilt has been established.

But assuming all the state's allegations were true, the appellate panel found Palm Beach Circuit Judge Jeffrey Colbath was right to not dismiss the case, as it should be up to a jury to decide whether Puy posed a threat.

"That argument may or may not have been successful to a factfinder," the opinion said. "The issue for this court is to determine whether, at this juncture of the proceedings, dismissal was warranted. We find that the trial court did not err, and that only a jury in this case could have made these factual determinations."

Since the statute doesn't explain how "threat" should be interpreted, the appellate panel turned to a dictionary, which described it as "an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury or damage." It also looked to the Second DCA, which found a threatening message is something that could "cause alarm in reasonable persons."

The opinion noted that in one Fifth DCA case, an appellate panel found a Snapchat message showing a student with a scoped AR-15 rifle with the caption, "Show and Tell @NM on Monday," demonstrated the potential to cause such alarm, and should be interpreted by a jury.

Fourth DCA Judge Spencer Levine wrote the ruling, backed by Judges Cory Ciklin and Jonathan Gerber.

Puy's fight isn't over yet, according to his attorney Salnick.

"Notwithstanding the appellate court's ruling on Mr. Puy's case, whose case is one of first impression under amended Florida Statute 836.10, we are still going through the appellate process and cannot comment further," Salnick said.

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody and West Palm Beach Assistant Attorney General Mitchell A. Egber represent the state. Their office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read the ruling:

More appeals:

Broward Judge Showed 'Disdain': 4th DCA Reverses Itself on Bias Petition

Does the First Amendment Protect Home Architecture? 11th Circuit to Decide