In re Standard Jury Instructions—Criminal Cases (99-1)

765 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 2000) · Supreme Court of Florida · March 30, 2000 · No. SC94788

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida authorized, with modifications, amendments to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (99-1). The opinion addressed instructions concerning Williams Rule evidence, felony battery, aggravated stalking, contraband offenses, driving under the influence, wildlife offenses, self-defense weapons, drug offenses near specified locations, and fleeing or eluding law enforcement officers. The authorized instructions were to become effective when the opinion became final.

Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Harding, C.J.; Shaw, J.; Wells, J.; Anstead, J.; Pariente, J.; Lewis, J.; Quince, J.
Jurisdiction
Florida
Decision date
March 30, 2000
Docket number
SC94788
Procedural posture
The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases petitioned the Supreme Court of Florida for approval and publication of proposed new and revised criminal jury instructions.
Precedential value
Published Florida Supreme Court opinion authorizing and modifying standard criminal jury instructions; precedential as to the court's stated statutory and procedural directives, but not an endorsement of the substantive correctness or applicability of every instruction.
Parties
Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases
Disposition
approved

Topics

standard jury instructionsjury instructionscriminal procedurelesser included offense instructionsevidence

Practice areas

Criminal lawCriminal procedureJury instructionsEvidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the proposed amendments and new criminal jury instructions should be authorized for publication and use.
  2. Whether the proposed contraband-in-a-juvenile-facility instruction accurately reflected the governing statute.
  3. Whether the fleeing-to-elude instructions adequately required proof that the defendant knew both of the order to stop and the ordering person's status as a duly authorized law enforcement officer.
  4. Whether certain proposed instructions should be classified as revised rather than new instructions.

Holdings

  1. The court authorized publication and use of the proposed instructions as modified by the court.
  2. The juvenile-facility contraband instruction must omit the 'through regular channels' alternative and must include authorization through program policy or operating procedure, in addition to authorization by the facility superintendent, program director, or manager.
  3. The fleeing-to-elude instructions must require the State to prove that the defendant knew both that the defendant had been ordered to stop and that the person issuing the order was a duly authorized law enforcement officer.
  4. Authorization of the instructions does not foreclose requests for additional or alternative instructions or challenges to the legal correctness of the instructions.

Key quotations

So modified, we hereby authorize the publication and use of the instructions as set forth in the appendix attached to this opinion. (706)
In so doing, we express no opinion on the correctness of these instructions and remind all interested parties that this authorization forecloses neither requesting additional or alternative instructions nor contesting the legal correctness of these instructions. (706)

Factual background

The committee proposed amendments to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, including instructions addressing Williams Rule evidence, felony battery, aggravated stalking, contraband, driving under the influence, fleeing to elude, voyeurism, self-defense weapons, and crimes motivated by prejudice. After publication and receipt of comments, the committee and the court made further revisions. The court specifically removed statutory language not applicable to contraband in juvenile facilities, added statutory authorization alternatives, and clarified knowledge requirements in fleeing-to-elude instructions.

Procedural history

The committee published proposed instructions for public comment, revised them in response to comments, and submitted them to the court. The court requested additional committee feedback and proposed technical modifications, then reviewed and further modified certain instructions before authorizing their publication and use.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…