Jury Inst. in Crim. Cases — Report No. 2007-5

Decision Date15 May 2008
Docket NumberNo. SC07-1420.,SC07-1420.
Citation982 So.2d 1160
PartiesIn re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES — REPORT NO. 2007-5.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

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

Bart Schneider, Assistant State Attorney, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Lake Mary, Florida; and R. Blaise Trettis, Executive Assistant Public Defender, Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, Viera, FL, Responding with comments.

PER CURIAM.

We have for consideration thirteen proposed amended or new Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases.1 The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (Committee) proposes Standard Jury Instructions 10.19 (Use of a Self-Defense Weapon) (amended); 11.13 (Voyeurism) (amended); 11.13(a)-(b) (Video Voyeurism) (new); 11.13(c)-(d) (Video Voyeurism Dissemination) (new); 11.13(e)-(g) (Commercial Video Voyeurism) (new); 14.7 (False Verification of Ownership or False Identification to a Pawnbroker) (new); 15.1 (Robbery) (amended); 15.2 (Carjacking) (amended); and 15.3 (Home Invasion Robbery) (amended).

The proposals were published for comment by the Court in the September 15, 2007, edition of The Florida Bar News. Three comments were received. In response to the comments, the Committee revised several of its proposals.

Having considered the Committee's report, the comments that were filed, and the Committee's response to those comments, we authorize the publication and use of all of the amended and new instructions.2 The instructions, as authorized, are set forth in the appendix to this opinion. New language is indicated by underlining, and deleted language is struck through. In authorizing the instructions for publication and use, we express no opinion on their correctness 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. The instructions as set forth in the appendix3 shall be effective when this opinion becomes final.

It is so ordered.

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

APPENDIX

10.19 USE OF A SELF-DEFENSE WEAPON

§ 790.054, Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of uUsing a sSelf-dDefense wWeapon against a law enforcement officer, the sState must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant) intentionally used a [self-defense chemical spray] [nonlethal stun gun] [nonlethal electric weapon] [remote dart firing stun gun] against (victim).

2. (Victim) was at the time a law enforcement officer.

3. (Defendant) knew (victim) was a law enforcement officer.

4. At the time of the incident, (victim) was engaged in the lawful performance of [his] [her] duties.

The court now instructs you that (name of official position of victim designated in charge) is a law enforcement officer. Do not read the name of the victim in this part of the instruction.

                Lesser Included Offenses
                --------------------------------------------------
                  USE OF A SELF-DEFENSE WEAPON § 790.054
                --------------------------------------------------
                CATEGORY CATEGORY FLA. INS
                ONE TWO STAT. NO
                --------------------------------------------------
                None
                --------------------------------------------------
                              Battery       784.03(1)(a)   8.3
                --------------------------------------------------
                

Comment

This instruction is based on section 790.054, Florida Statutes (1997). In giving this instruction, do not refer to the victim by name in the last sentence of the instruction. That sentence must state the class of officers to which the victim belongs, e.g., probation officer, correctional officer. See Wright v. State, 586 So.2d 1025[1024] (Fla.1991).

This instruction was adopted in 2000 and amended in 2008.

11.13 VOYEURISM

§ 810.14, Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Voyeurism, the sState must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant) secretly

[observed]

[photographed]

[filmed]

[videotaped]

[recorded]

(victim).

2. The (act alleged) was done with a [lewd] [lascivious] [indecent] intent.

3. When (victim) was [observed] [photographed] [filmed] [videotaped] [recorded] [he] [she] was in a [dwelling] [structure] [conveyance] in which [he] [she] had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The words lewd, lascivious, and indecent mean the same thing, a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious, or sensual intent on the part of the person doing the act.

Definitions.

"Dwelling" means a building [or conveyance] of any kind, including any attached porch, whether such building [or conveyance] is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night, together with the enclosed space of ground and outbuildings immediately surrounding it.

"Structure" means any kind of building, either temporary or permanent, that has a roof over it, together with the enclosed space of ground and outbuildings immediately surrounding it.

"Conveyance" means any motor vehicle, ship, vessel, railroad car, trailer, aircraft or sleeping car.

Lesser Included Offenses

No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

Comment

This instruction is based on § 810.14, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998.). It is error to inform the jury of a prior conviction before a determination of guilt of the charged offense. Therefore, do not read the allegation of prior conviction or send the information or indictment into the jury room. If the defendant is convicted of the current charge, the historical fact of a previous conviction shall be determined separately. State v. Harris, 356 So.2d 315 (Fla.1978). beyond a reasonable doubt by the jury in a bifurcated proceeding. State v. Harbaugh, 754 So.2d 691 (Fla.2000).

This instruction was adopted in 2000 , and amended in 2008.

11.13(a) VIDEO VOYEURISM

§ 810.145(2)(a) or (b), Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Video Voyeurism, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

Give 1a or 1b as applicable.

1. (Defendant)

a. intentionally [used] [or] [installed] an imaging device to secretly [view] [broadcast] [or] [record] (victim) for [his] [her] own [amusement] [entertainment] [sexual arousal] [gratification] [or] [profit] [or] [for the purpose of degrading or abusing (victim) ].

b. intentionally permitted [the use] [or] [installation] of an imaging device to secretly [view] [broadcast] [or] [record] (victim) for the [amusement] [entertainment] [sexual arousal] [gratification] [or] [profit] [of another or on behalf of another].

2. (Victim) was thereby [viewed] [broadcast] [or] [recorded] at a time when the (victim) was [dressing] [undressing] [or] [privately exposing [his] [her] body].

3. At the place and time when (victim) was [viewed] [broadcast] [or] [recorded] [he] [she] had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

4. The [viewing] [broadcast] [or] [recording] of (victim) was without the knowledge and consent of (victim).

Definitions.

"Broadcast" means electronically transmitting a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by another person.

"Imaging device" means any mechanical, digital, or electronic viewing device; still camera; camcorder; motion picture camera; or any other instrument, equipment, or format capable of recording, storing, or transmitting visual images of another person.

"Place and time when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy" means a place and time when a reasonable person would believe that he or she could fully disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that his or her undressing was being viewed, recorded, or broadcasted by another, including, but not limited to, the interior of a bathroom, changing room, fitting room, dressing room, or tanning booth.

"Privately exposing the body" means exposing a sexual organ.

Lesser Included Offenses

No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

Comment

It is error to inform the jury of a prior conviction before a determination of guilt of the charged offense. Therefore, do not read the allegation of prior conviction or send the information or indictment into the jury room. If the defendant is convicted of the current charge, the historical fact of a previous conviction shall be determined beyond a reasonable doubt by the jury in a bifurcated proceeding. State v. Harbaugh, 754 So.2d 691 (Fla.2000).

This instruction was adopted in 2008.

11.13(b) VIDEO VOYEURISM

§ 810.145(2)(c), Fla. Stat.

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

1. (Defendant) intentionally used an imaging device to secretly [view] [broadcast] [or] [record] [under] [or] [through] the clothing worn by (victim) for the [amusement] [entertainment] [sexual arousal] [gratification] [or] [profit] of [himself] [herself] [or] [another].

2. (Defendant's) use of the imaging device was for the purpose of viewing [the body of] [or] [the undergarments worn by] (victim).

3. (Defendant's) use of the imaging device was without the knowledge and consent of (victim).

Definitions.

"Broadcast" means electronically transmitting a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by another person.

"Imaging device" means any mechanical, digital, or electronic viewing device; still camera; camcorder; motion picture camera; or any other instrument, equipment, or format capable of recording, storing, or transmitting visual images of another person.

Lesser Included Offenses

No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

Comment

It is error to inform the jury of a prior...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT