In Re Standard Jury Instruct. in Criminal Cases No. 2008-04

995 So. 2d 476, 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 864, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 2049, 2008 WL 4736377
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedOctober 30, 2008
DocketSC08-699
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 995 So. 2d 476 (In Re Standard Jury Instruct. in Criminal Cases No. 2008-04) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Standard Jury Instruct. in Criminal Cases No. 2008-04, 995 So. 2d 476, 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 864, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 2049, 2008 WL 4736377 (Fla. 2008).

Opinion

995 So.2d 476 (2008)

In re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES-REPORT NO. 2008-04.

No. SC08-699.

Supreme Court of Florida.

October 30, 2008.

Judge Terry David Terrell, Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, First Judicial Circuit, Pensacola, FL, for Petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (Committee) has filed a report, proposing amendments to Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases 8.7(b) — Aggravated Stalking (Injunction Entered); 11.2 — Sexual Battery Victim 12 Years of Age or Older — Great Force; 11.3 — Sexual Battery Victim 12 Years of Age or Older — Specified Circumstances; 11.6 — Sexual Battery upon Child 12 Years of Age or Older but Under 18 Years of Age by Person in Familial or Custodial Authority; 23.1 — Maintaining a House of Prostitution; 23.2 — Soliciting for the Purpose of Prostitution; 23.3 — Transporting for the Purpose of Prostitution; 23.4 — Receiving for the Purpose of Prostitution; 23.5 — Offering to Commit, Committing, or Engaging in Prostitution, Lewdness, or Assignation; 23.6 — Soliciting for Prostitution; 23.7 — Entering for the Purpose of Prostitution, Lewdness, or Assignation; 23.8 — Definitions for Use With s. 796.07, Fla. Stat.; and 23.9 — Optional Definitions for Use With s. 796.07, Fla. Stat. The Committee published the proposals for comment in The Florida Bar News prior to submission to the Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.

Having considered the Committee's report and comments submitted to the Committee, we hereby authorize the publication and use of eleven instructions as amended, and elimination of two current instructions which include out-of-date definitions, as set forth in the appendix to this opinion, with slight modification to instruction 23.2.[1] In so doing, we express no *477 opinion on the correctness of those instructions and remind all interested parties that this authorization forecloses neither requesting additional or alternative instructions nor contesting the legal correctness of the instructions. We further caution all interested parties that any notes and comments associated with the instructions reflect only the opinion of the Committee and are not necessarily indicative of the views of this Court as to their correctness or applicability. New language is indicated by underlining, and deleted language is struck through. The instructions as set forth in the appendix[2] shall be effective when this opinion becomes final.

It is so ordered.

QUINCE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS, and CANADY, JJ., concur.

POLSTON, J., did not participate.

APPENDIX

8.7(b) AGGRAVATED STALKING

(Injunction Entered)

§ 784.048(4), Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Aggravated Stalking, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant) knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly [followed] [harassed] [or] [cyberstalked] (victim).

Give 2a or 2b as applicable.

2. At the time of the [following] [harassing] [cyberstalking],

a. an injunction for protection against [repeat] [sexual] [dating] [domestic] violence had been entered against (defendant) for the benefit of (victim).

b. a court had imposed a prohibition of conduct on (defendant) toward (victim) or (victim's property).

3. (Defendant) knew that the [injunction] [court-imposed prohibition of conduct] had been entered against [him] [her].

Definitions.

"Harass" means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.

"Cyberstalk" means to engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, words, images, *478 or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at a specific person, causing substantial emotional distress to that person and serving no legitimate purpose.

"Maliciously" means wrongfully, intentionally, and without legal justification or excuse.

Lesser Included Offenses

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           AGGRAVATED STALKING (Injunction Entered) — 784.048(4)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CATEGORY ONE   CATEGORY TWO                             FLA. STAT.     INS. NO.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stalking                                                784.048(2)     8.6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Attempt                                  777.04(1)      5.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Violation of injunction for protection   741.31(4)      8.16
               against domestic violence
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Violation of injunction for protection   784.047        8.19
               against repeat, sexual, or dating                       ____
               violence
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment

See Seese v. State, 955 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). This instruction was adopted in 1995 [657 So.2d 1152] and was amended in 2007 [953 So.2d 495], and 2008.

11.2 SEXUAL BATTERY — VICTIM 12 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER — GREAT FORCE

§ 794.011(3), Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Sexual Battery upon a Person 12 Years of Age or Older with the Use of a Deadly Weapon or Physical Force, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) was 12 years of age or older.
2. a. [ (Defendant) committed an act [upon] [with] (victim) in which the sexual organ of the [ (defendant) ] [(victim) ] penetrated or had union with the [anus] [vagina] [mouth] of the [ (victim) ] [ (defendant) ].]
b. [ (Defendant) committed an act upon (victim) in which the [anus] [vagina] of (victim) was penetrated by an object.]
3. (Defendant) in the process
a. [used or threatened to use a deadly weapon].
b. [used actual physical force likely to cause serious personal injury].
4. The act was done without the consent of (victim).

Give in all cases.

"Consent" means intelligent, knowing, and voluntary consent and does not include coerced submission. Consent does not mean the failure by the alleged victim to offer physical resistance to the offender.

*479 Give if applicable.

Evidence of the victim's mental incapacity or defect, if any, may be considered in determining whether there was an intelligent, knowing, and voluntary consent.

"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his or her conduct due to the influence of a narcotic, anesthetic, or intoxicating substance administered to that person without his or her consent, or due to any other act committed upon that person without his or her consent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—report 2017-02
229 So. 3d 295 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2017)
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report No. 2012-05
131 So. 3d 755 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2013)
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report 2012-07
122 So. 3d 302 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2013)
In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report No. 2010-03
35 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 559 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2010)
Miller v. State
4 So. 3d 732 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
995 So. 2d 476, 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 864, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 2049, 2008 WL 4736377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-standard-jury-instruct-in-criminal-cases-no-2008-04-fla-2008.