Liquid Cocaine: A New Challenge for Latin American Authorities

Month: December 2020

Liquid Cocaine: A New Challenge for Latin American Authorities

first_img BOGOTÁ, Colombia – In their constant efforts to deceive counter-narcotics agents, drug traffickers have found another way to camouflage cocaine: diluting it. The method recently was exposed in Bolivia, where agents from the Special Force in the Fight Against Drug Trafficking (FELCN) confiscated 13 kilograms (28 pounds) of liquid cocaine in the city of Abapó in the department of Santa Cruz on April 28. Authorities also seized 500 kilograms (1,102 pounds) of sodium hydroxide in 20 bags before arresting the driver of the truck transporting the narcotics. “Drug traffickers will always try to use unconventional methods, because their goal is to deceive police controls so the substance can pass unnoticed,” Lt. Col. Fernando Amurrio, head of the FELCN in Santa Cruz, said during a media conference. It’s easy to transform cocaine into liquid because the narcotic is highly soluble. Half a kilogram (1.1 pounds) of the drug can be diluted in a liter (0.26 gallons) of water. It’s also easy for liquid cocaine to be returned to its original state, as 90% can be decanted and filtered, according to FELCN. A kilogram (2.2 pounds) of cocaine costs about US$1,300 in Bolivia, but it’s worth more in Argentina (US$5,000), Spain (US$60,000) and New Zealand (US$100,000), according to the Bolivian daily El Día. Roberto Carlos Achá Arandia, a counter-narcotics prosecutor in Bolivia, said the trafficking of narcotics in their liquid forms is becoming more common throughout South America. “The mules [people who swallow the drug to transport the merchandise] now carry it in capsules made out of condoms [to protect the drug and the carrier’s digestive system],” said Achá, according to El Día. This type of smuggling makes the drug much harder to detect through the use of X-ray or ultrasound scanners, Arandia said. By Dialogo May 13, 2011 One of the largest seizures of liquid cocaine was on board the “Guasare II” vessel, sailing under a Venezuelan flag, in international waters. During the operation, carried out in April 2008, the U.S. Coast Guard confiscated a shipment of 2,000 liters (528 gallons) of liquid cocaine, according to Mexican daily El Universal. “Trafficking methods are like fads: What is hot today is cocaine in a solution, particularly in fuels,” said Hernán Bernal, coordinator of the Studies and International Relations Group of Colombia’s National Directorate on Narcotics, according to El Universal.center_img In March, Colombian National Police reported the seizure 276 kilograms (608 pounds) of liquid cocaine during an operation in the city of San Félix in the department of Antioquia. “It is not usual to find [liquid cocaine], much less the level of purity found [by the police],” said Gen. Yesid Vásquez, commander of the Medellín Metropolitan Police, according to the website El Colombiano.com. Vásquez said narco-traffickers are smuggling liquid drugs to the United States and Europe more frequently because they are easier to get through airport security checkpoints without detection. On April 18, in the city of Barranquilla in the department of Atlántico, a drug-sniffing dog from the North Region Counter-Narcotics Company of Colombia’s National Police detected a 1,400-kilogram (3,086-pound) shipment of cocaine stored in seven motor oil containers on the ‘Seven Seas’ ship, sailing under a Honduran flag. Meantime, on April 25 in Argentina, authorities stopped a Bolivian woman carrying five kilograms (11 pounds) of liquid cocaine in her luggage on a bus departing from the province of Salta, on the Bolivian border. Police agencies worldwide are on alert. Barcelona National Police arrested a Spanish man and Brazilian woman at El Prat Airport on May 2 after finding eight kilograms (17 pounds) of liquid cocaine had been injected into clothing and two insect repellent cans allegedly in the couple’s possession.last_img read more

Continue Reading

Transoceanic XXVI Multinational Exercise Concludes in Peru

first_imgBy Dialogo September 23, 2011 In late September, the review and evaluation meeting of the Transoceanic XXVI multinational exercise came to an end, at the Naval Tactical Training Center (CENTAC) of the Peruvian Navy (MGP). Peruvian Vice Admiral Carlos Tejada Mera, in his role as host of the event, emphasized in his closing address the success obtained at the meeting with the achievement of the proposed objectives, in response to the interest of the Maritime Traffic Control Organization (ORGACONTRAM) in establishing common standards to guarantee the safety of maritime commerce and to the interest of regional maritime authorities in improving the operational procedures for traffic control. The meeting was attended and participated in by the local operational control commanders (COLCO) of the regional Navies belonging to the International Maritime Traffic Defense (CODEFTRAMI) plan; representatives from the Navies of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay; and local operational control commanders and advisors working under the South Atlantic Maritime Area Coordinator (CAMAS). South Africa also has a clear interest in these exercises. At the meeting, agreement was reached on changes in the current rules and operational procedures incorporated in the Standing Operations Order, and Ecuador was confirmed as the host of the next exercise, Transoceanic XXVII, which will take place from August 6 to 17, 2012. The final planning session will be held from May 11 to 17, 2012, in the city of Guayaquil. The Transoceanic XXVI exercise took place from August 8 to 19, with the participation of the Navies of the countries mentioned above. It involved planning and guidance of control operations for international merchant ships and fishing boats, real and fictitious, in a global operational scenario. In addition, a regional course on dispersant use (OPRC Level 3) was held in August, the opening session of which took place at the San Borja Naval Center (Lima, Peru), and in which the general secretary of the Regional Cooperation Operational Network of Maritime Authorities of the Americas (ROCRAM), Alejandro Martínez Moreno, and representatives from the maritime authorities of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela, members of the mentioned network, participated. The objective of the course was to improve management capabilities to optimize preparation for and processes of response to spills of hydrocarbons and other polluting substances.last_img read more

Continue Reading

The Media War

first_img The speed and scope of broadcasting, the improved technique of filming and editing videos for mobilization, recruitment, education and persuasiveness from several public or organizations advertising these conflicts has turned into a real media war. *André Luís Woloszyn, Strategic Intelligence Analyst All with the intent of keeping up with the new utilization trends of internet users, as determined by the rapid growth of social networks, such as blogs, Twitter, and Facebook. Many of these media products are advertised by large communication companies that take advantage of factors such as cost and risks minimization for their employees. Excellent article, it’s simple and direct. It presents a paradox. Media, through time, contributed for freedom and democracy. Today it’s been used to destroy freedom and democracy. By Dialogo April 17, 2013 This strategy started with the so-called insurgents and terrorist groups in Iraq, who, aware of the importance of influencing the public opinion worldwide, started to film and photograph with their mobile phones, suicidal attacks involving coalition forces, especially the explosion of IEDs (improvised explosive devises). They would edit images and texts in Arabic and minutes later broadcast through some of the main international TV networks, as well as spread via the internet. center_img Recently, social networks showed their efficiency when it was posted via Twitter the tactics used by an Israeli command in a confidential operation to approach the SV Estelle Finnish ship, that was breaking through the blockage toward the Gaza Strip. Also broadcasted live was the development of Operation Geronimo, which resulted in the capture of Al Qaeda terrorist leader in Pakistan. Although it is an irreversible trend, the danger lies in the inability to control and the misusage of virtual media, including the fraudulent manipulation, the lack of ethical commitment and, in many cases, the veracity of facts. During this war, the security forces are at a disadvantage, since the material collected by these forces requires prior approval, while the broadcast of images captured by other segments is almost immediate. The regular wars and asymmetric conflicts in the 21st Century, especially in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Middle East region, have presented a new reality in terms of global media. This truly virtual revolution, as it has been called, is used by both military and terrorist groups and insurgents as a strength multiplying strategy that adds to the firepower. Aside from negatively influencing the morale of the troops and security forces, due to the degree of violence shown in the videos and because of the intimidation of possible collaborators, it turned out to be an excellent recruiting tool. last_img read more

Continue Reading

U.N. Secretary General Recommends Further Staff Reduction at MINUSTAH

first_img In addition, the Mission has 2,600 police officers. However, with regard to the political field, Ban said that “the democratic process in Haiti is still fragile,” and that he was “deeply concerned with the delay” to hold partial legislative, municipal and local elections. Secretary General Ban sent a report to the Security Council, requesting, “To consider another personnel reduction” in the U.N. Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), reducing troops from 6,270 to 5,021 by June 2014. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon recommended a 15% reduction of Blue Helmets in Haiti, due to improvements in security. “I hereby request Haitian political leaders to conduct a constructive dialogue, in order to achieve minimum political consensus and then hold elections whenever possible.” Haiti is a disaster, and has been like that for many years. The question is, is the UN there to prevent the country from being invaded by a foreign nation or from completely falling in the hands of drug cartels? Because no one talks about the life quality indicators and the only thing we know are the repeated news regarding the horrible living conditions of the majority of the population and the situation seems hopeless. I sent a regular comment and nothing was posted. By Dialogo August 22, 2013last_img read more

Continue Reading

Colombian National Army Captures Alleged Drug Trafficker

first_imgBy Dialogo March 27, 2015 Special Forces of the Colombian National Army’s Aviation Air Assault Division have captured an alleged narcotrafficker and Clan Úsuga leader in the Urabá region, near the country’s border with Panama. The DNCD, working with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), learned of the suspicious vessel after it was spotted by radar; then, the Navy interdicted the boat off the coast of the Province of San Cristóbal. He’s also suspected of working with Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia’s (FARC) Sixth Front. The FARC, which is the country’s largest guerrilla group, uses narcotrafficking proceeds to fund its terrorist activities. The suspect, accused of supplying cocaine and other narcotics to the Sinaloa Cartel and Los Zetas — two Mexican transnational criminal organizations — allegedly coordinated the speedboats that transported those drugs to Panama. There, the cartels would take possession of the shipments and transport them throughout Central America, the United States, and Belgium, which serves as a gateway for illicit goods into Europe. There, they found cocaine packed in 30 bales and stored in the bottom of a small fiberglass boat. Security forces took it to the National Forensic Science Institute (INACIF) to be weighed, while the suspects were detained at DNCD’s headquarters. Meanwhile, the DNCD is investigating which narcotrafficking or organized crime group owned the cocaine, which originated in South America and was destined for the United States and Europe. Dominican security forces seize 600 packages of cocaine Special Forces of the Colombian National Army’s Aviation Air Assault Division have captured an alleged narcotrafficker and Clan Úsuga leader in the Urabá region, near the country’s border with Panama. The DNCD, working with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), learned of the suspicious vessel after it was spotted by radar; then, the Navy interdicted the boat off the coast of the Province of San Cristóbal. Dominican security forces seize 600 packages of cocaine He’s also suspected of working with Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia’s (FARC) Sixth Front. The FARC, which is the country’s largest guerrilla group, uses narcotrafficking proceeds to fund its terrorist activities. The suspect expected to be extradited to the U.S., where he’s wanted on federal drug-trafficking charges in the state of Texas. The Dominican Republic’s National Navy and National Directorate for Drug Control (DNCD) teamed up to seize 600 packages of cocaine from a boat seven nautical miles southeast of Punta Palenque on March 20; they also captured three suspects, who are Dominican nationals. The Dominican Republic’s National Navy and National Directorate for Drug Control (DNCD) teamed up to seize 600 packages of cocaine from a boat seven nautical miles southeast of Punta Palenque on March 20; they also captured three suspects, who are Dominican nationals. The suspect expected to be extradited to the U.S., where he’s wanted on federal drug-trafficking charges in the state of Texas. The arrest comes after Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos recently deployed 1,200 Military Troops and National Police Officers to the Department of Antioquia to capture Clan Úsuga members. That operation – called Operation “Toma Masiva del Urabá” (Massive Taking of Urabá) — is utilizing the Neptuno Task Force, which combines 12 existing task forces and is made up of members of the Army, Air Force, Navy, and National Police. Rear Admiral Ricardo Hurtado Chacón heads Neptuno Task Force, while Major General Ricardo Alberto Restrepo Londoño, the head of the Colombian National Police’s Counter-narcotics Division, will lead the overall operation. The arrest comes after Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos recently deployed 1,200 Military Troops and National Police Officers to the Department of Antioquia to capture Clan Úsuga members. That operation – called Operation “Toma Masiva del Urabá” (Massive Taking of Urabá) — is utilizing the Neptuno Task Force, which combines 12 existing task forces and is made up of members of the Army, Air Force, Navy, and National Police. Rear Admiral Ricardo Hurtado Chacón heads Neptuno Task Force, while Major General Ricardo Alberto Restrepo Londoño, the head of the Colombian National Police’s Counter-narcotics Division, will lead the overall operation. The suspect, accused of supplying cocaine and other narcotics to the Sinaloa Cartel and Los Zetas — two Mexican transnational criminal organizations — allegedly coordinated the speedboats that transported those drugs to Panama. There, the cartels would take possession of the shipments and transport them throughout Central America, the United States, and Belgium, which serves as a gateway for illicit goods into Europe. There, they found cocaine packed in 30 bales and stored in the bottom of a small fiberglass boat. Security forces took it to the National Forensic Science Institute (INACIF) to be weighed, while the suspects were detained at DNCD’s headquarters. Meanwhile, the DNCD is investigating which narcotrafficking or organized crime group owned the cocaine, which originated in South America and was destined for the United States and Europe.last_img read more

Continue Reading

Colombia Deals Blow to Illegal Mining

first_imgBy Myriam Ortega/Diálogo September 25, 2018 In mid-August, the Colombian Army conducted a joint operation against illicit mining in Ayapel, Córdoba department, with the Colombian Air Force (FAC, in Spanish), the National Police, and the Colombian Office of the Attorney General. The Clan del Golfo armed group ran the illegal mining operation. During the operation, the Colombian forces captured 17 individuals and destroyed three dredges, three engines, and three mining production units. The Army valued the equipment at more than $800,000, and estimated the alleged criminals made about $100,000 monthly with the illegal business. The joint, interagency operation conducted under the Agamenón II military and police campaign is the toughest blow to Clan del Golfo’s funding sources so far in 2018. It’s the ninth operation against illegal mining this year in the northern region of western Colombia. “Illegal mining in Colombia is thought to be the second driver of funding for armed groups,” Army Colonel Carlos Alberto Montenegro Maya, commander of the Brigade Against Illegal Mining (BRCMI, in Spanish), told Diálogo. “In the illegal market, a kilo of cocaine hydrochloride in Bogotá can cost more than $1,900, while a kilo of gold is worth more than $4,500.” The operation “The Ayapel operation started a few months ago [in March] with investigations,” Col. Montenegro said. “We began collecting evidence; we did some intelligence meetings in the Montería area [in Córdoba department] with the Office of the Attorney General, the military unit, and the Police; and we began coordinating how to best conduct the operation.” The Army and FAC’s intelligence led the units to several strategic illegal mining locations. The goal of the combined forces was to catch those carrying out the illegal mining work. “The operation was coordinated with the Police and their aircraft,” Army Lieutenant Colonel Rafael Hernández Oyola, environmental adviser at BRCMI, told Diálogo. “We have national jurisdiction because we’re a special unit. We always go to the areas and operate with regional troops or special units.” About 150 service members and Police agents took part in the operation under the command of Col. Hernández. Units infiltrated the area with land vehicles and a FAC C-295 turboprop tactical aircraft, as well a Black Hawk helicopter from the Police and another from the Army, serving as support aircraft to remove the units after the operation. Authorities brought the captured individuals to the local Office of the Attorney General for prosecution. The Police explosives team disabled the equipment onsite. Environmental crime The last operation against illegal mining took place in the Ayapel Marsh. Extending more than 54,000 hectares, the Córdoba wetland was declared a protected area in February 2018 under the Ramsar Convention of 1975, an international treaty for the conservation and sustainable use of wetlands. The Ayapel Marsh is a place of abundant biodiversity. Home to more than 350 species, it’s essential to fish reproduction and bird migration. However, illegal mining affects its fragile ecosystem. According to the Army, Clan del Golfo’s illicit operation damaged about 640 hectares. “Open-pit mining operations are very close to rivers where extractions are made. Dredges are used to move large quantities of the earth’s crust, damaging forests, trees, and everything around,” Col. Montenegro said. “[With the use of mercury] the damage is huge, as it leaves blue or green pools that are only seen when flying over. These are mostly mercury sediments that last for many years. It could take hundreds of years for the land to recover.” A complex problem Illegal mining enriches transnational criminal organizations and affects the environment and the local population. Miners, who are forced by armed groups to work illegally, or join the “group with the financial muscle,” according to Col. Hernández, pollute the area and risk their health through mercury exposure. According to the latest report available, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s 2014 Environmental Performance Review on Colombia, mining towns in Antioquia department have the highest levels of mercury pollution in the world. Low-income people who work in illegal mining are the most exposed to dangerous substances, the report indicates. To confront the problem, the Colombian government passed Law 1658 in 2013, giving the mining sector five years to implement new technologies and clean alternatives to gold extraction. Since July 2018, the law bans the use of mercury in mining. Although environmentalists welcomed the law’s approval, deterring the use of mercury in criminal groups will be harder. The price of the substance used to extract gold is on the rise since the third quarter of 2018. Authorities, however, will continue to face cases of mercury use, as in the Ayapel Marsh. “Four or five months ago, when mercury was legal, a kilo cost almost $100. Now that it’s illegal, a kilo costs about $420,” Col. Montenegro concluded. “It’s a very complex problem.”last_img read more

Continue Reading

U.S. Navy Medical Team Begins Subject Matter Expert Exchanges in Honduras

first_imgBy By Petty Officer 3rd Class Katie Cox October 11, 2018 U.S. Navy medical professionals assigned to Southern Partnership Station’s (SPS) Fleet Health Engagement Team (FHET) arrived in Honduras September 14th to begin subject matter expert exchanges (SMEE) and partner capacity building engagements with Honduran medical and emergency management professionals in Tegucigalpa as part of SPS 2018. SPS’ FHET will conduct SMEEs with Honduran representatives focused on specific topics such as tactical combat casualty care (TCCC), preventative medicine, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) response procedures, and insect-borne disease prevention. “We have a set of experiences from Iraq and Afghanistan and our partner nations have a lot of their own experiences,” said Lt. Cmdr. Rachel Carter, an emergency and family medicine physician assigned to the FHET. “By sharing and discussing the evidence from these experiences, we come up with the best practices to prevent unnecessary loss of life in trauma and disaster situations.” Following productive visits to Colombia and Trinidad and Tobago, this stop marks the third FHET engagement during SPS. The FHET is scheduled to conduct their final mission stop of SPS in El Salvador to work alongside the nation’s military forces, security forces, and civilian health professionals. Engagements like these hone participants’ skills in a variety of knowledge and skills, including HADR. “When there are disasters and you need to rely on partner nations, you want to know their capabilities and capacity to respond,” said Lt. Cmdr. Stefanie Nochisaki, a public health nurse assigned to SPS’ FHET. “This helps us to better understand each other and how each other operates and functions in these situations.” Southern Partnership Station’s FHET medical exchanges will continue to lay the groundwork for future endeavors. “I feel the medical exchanges during Southern Partnership Station 2018 will lay a good framework and excellent foundation for future partnerships,” said Hospital Corpsman 1st Class Osei Bonsu, an independent duty corpsman assigned to the FHET. “Practicing together as a team improves our relationships as ‘teammates’ for future missions.” Held on an annual basis by U.S. Southern Command and executed by U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command/U.S. 4th Fleet, Southern Partnership Station is a U.S. Navy deployment focused on SMEEs with partner nation militaries and security forces in the Caribbean, Central and South America. Focused on enhancing cooperative partnerships with regional maritime services, SPS aims to improve operational readiness for all participants. Additionally, the mission will provide an opportunity for U.S. and partner nations to operate in a multinational environment, refine coordination, improve interoperability, and demonstrate flexibility. SPS is a demonstration of the strong U.S. commitment to partners in the Caribbean, Central and South America, fostering goodwill and enhancing our collective ability to respond to natural disasters and humanitarian crises. SPS will conclude in October 2018. For more news about Southern Partnership Station 2018, visit https://www.dvidshub.net/feature/SouthernPartnershipStation2018, on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/SouthernPartnershipStation/, on Twitter at https://twitter.com/NavySPS/, or on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/southernpartnershipstation/last_img read more

Continue Reading

Notice: Proposed civil jury instructions

first_imgThe Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases invites comment on the proposed changes shown below. After reviewing comments received in response to this publication, the committee will make its final proposal to the Florida Supreme Court. Please submit all comments to Judge Philip J. Padovano, Chair, First District Court Of Appeal, 301 South Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., Tallahassee, FL 32399-1850. Your comments must be received by October 31 to ensure that they are considered by the committee.1. Revised drug abuse instructions 25.2 DRUG ABUSE — SALE, PURCHASE, MANUFACTURE, DELIVERY, OR POSSESSION WITH INTENT § 893.13(1)(a), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following (applicable number) elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [possessed with intent to sell] [possessed with the intent to purchase] [possessed with intent to manufacture] [possessed with intent to deliver] a certain substance. 2. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . Give if possession is charged 3. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Manufacture § 893.02(12)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment Note § 893.13(1)(g), Fla.Stat., if the charge involves possession or delivery without consideration of not more than 20 grams of cannabis. If the defense seeks to show a lack of knowledge as to the nature of a particular drug, an additional instruction may be required. See State v. Medlin , 273 So.2d 394 (Fla. 1973). This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.3 DRUG ABUSE – SALE, PURCHASE, DELIVERY, OR POSSESSION IN EXCESS OF TEN GRAMS § 893.13(1)(b), Fla.Stat. This instruction will have to be altered if a combination of substances is alleged. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following (applicable number) elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) [sold] [purchased] [delivered] [possessed] more than 10 grams of a certain substance. 2. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . Give if possession is charged 3. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. [Lesser Included Offensesm chart has no changes] Comment If the defense seeks to show a lack of knowledge as to the nature of a particular drug, an additional instruction may be required. See State v. Medlin, 273 So.2d 394 (Fla. 1973). This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.4 DRUG ABUSE — DELIVERY TO OR USE OF MINOR § 893.13(1)(c), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. a. [ (Defendant) delivered a certain substance to a person under the age of 18 years.] Give 1a, 1b, or 1c as applicable b. [ (Defendant) used or hired a person under the age of 18 years as an agent or employee in the sale or delivery of a certain substance.] c. [ (Defendant) used a person under the age of 18 years to assist in avoiding detection or apprehension for (violation of Chapter 893, Fla.Stat., alleged) .] 2. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . 3. (Defendant) was 18 years of age or older at the time. Definition § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.5 DRUG ABUSE – BRINGING INTO STATE § 893.13(1)(d), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) brought a certain substance into Florida. 2. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . 3. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. Definition To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment If the defense seeks to show a lack of knowledge as to the nature of a particular drug, an additional instruction may be required. See State v. Medlin, 273 So.2d 394 (Fla. 1973). This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1997 and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.6 DRUG ABUSE – SALE, PURCHASE, MANUFACTURE, ORDELIVERY IN SPECIFIED LOCATIONS § 893.13(1)(c), (d) and (e) To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [possessed with intent to sell] [possessed with intent to manufacture] [possessed with intent to deliver] a certain substance. Give a, b or c as applicable 2. a. in, on, or within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising a child care facility or a public or private elementary, middle, or secondary school between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. (§ 893.13(1)(c), Fla.Stat.) b. in, on, or within 200 feet of [the real property comprising a public housing facility] [the real property comprising a public or private college, university, or other postsecondary educational institution] [a public park]. (§ 893.13(1)(d), Fla.Stat.) c. in, on, or within 1000 feet of [a physical place for worship at which a church or religious organization regularly conducts a religious services] [a convenience business]. (§ 893.13(1)(e), Fla.Stat.) 3. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . 4. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. Definitions; give as applicable. “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means : (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed . If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Definitions; give as applicable “Child care facility” means any child care center or arrangement which provides child care for more than five children unrelated to the operator and which receives a payment, fee, or grant for any of the children receiving care. It does not matter if the child care facility is operated for profit or as a nonprofit operation. A “convenience business” means any place of business that is primarily engaged in the retail sale of groceries, or both groceries and gasoline, and that is open for business at any time between the hours of 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. The term does not include any of the following: a business that is primarily a restaurant, or one that always has at least five employees on the premises after 11 p.m. and before 5 a.m., or one that has at least 10,000 square feet of retail floor space. The term “convenience business” also does not include any business in which the owner or members of his family work between the hours of 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. The term “real property comprising a public housing facility” is defined as the real property of a public corporation created as a housing authority by statute. [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment This instruction is based on section 893.13, Florida Statutes (1997), and adapted from the standard instruction on sale of contraband near a school. In Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996), the court defined the elements of constructive possession that apply if the defendant has no control over the place where the contraband was found. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989, 1997, and 2000 , and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.7 DRUG ABUSE – POSSESSION § 893.13(1)(f), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) possessed a certain substance. 2. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . 3. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. Definition To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Lesser Included Offenses No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. Comment If the defense seeks to show a lack of knowledge as to the nature of a particular drug, an additional instruction may be required. See State v. Medlin, 273 So.2d 394 (Fla. 1973). Note § 893.13(1)(g), Fla.Stat., if the charge involves possession or delivery without consideration of not more than 20 grams of cannabis. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.8 DRUG ABUSE — OBTAINING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE BY FRAUD, ETC. § 893.13(3)(a)1, Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of Obtaining a Controlled Substance by [misrepresentation] [forgery] [deception] [subterfuge] the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) [acquired or obtained] [attempted to acquire or obtain] possession of a certain substance. 2. The substance was (specific substance alleged) . 3. (Defendant) [acquired or obtained] [attempted to acquire or obtain] the substance by [misrepresentation]. [fraud]. [forgery]. [deception]. [subterfuge]. Give if applicable — § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Lesser Included Offenses No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. Comment This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 25.9 TRAFFICKING IN CANNABIS § 893.135(1)(a), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” Cannabis is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of Trafficking in Cannabis, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) knowingly [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] a certain substance. 2. The substance was cannabis. 3. [ The quantity of the cannabis involved was in excess of 50 25 pounds. ] [The quantity of the cannabis was 300 or more cannabis plants.] See State v. Dominguez, 509 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1987) 4. (Defendant) knew that the substance was cannabis. If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla.Stat., the following bracketed language should be given instead of element 4 above. For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to sell heroin, but actually sold cannabis, the alternate element 4 would be given. [4. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] [bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 893.135(1), Fla.Stat.) , but actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] cannabis.] Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Manufacture § 893.02(12)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give only if the defendant asserts the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance – § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. See State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1991) The punishment provided by law for the crime of Trafficking in Cannabis is greater depending on the amount of cannabis involved. Therefore, if you find the defendant guilty of trafficking in cannabis, you must determine by your verdict whether: Enhanced penalty; give if applicable up to extent of charge a. [The quantity of the substance cannabis involved was in excess of 50 25 pounds but less than 2,000 pounds.] [The quantity of the cannabis involved was 300 or more cannabis plants but not more than 2,000 plants.] b. [The quantity of the substance involved was 2,000 pounds or more but less than 10,000 pounds.] [The quantity of the cannabis involved was 2000 or more cannabis plants but not more than 10,000 plants.] c. [The quantity of the substance involved was 10,000 pounds or more.] [The quantity of the cannabis involved was 10,000 or more plants.] [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment Section 893.101(2) and (3), Florida Statutes, require the availability of the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance and the accompanying instruction on the “permissive presumption” of knowledge. Proof of the fourth element of the crime, i.e. that the defendant knew the substance was cannabis, is close to but not identical with proof that the defendant knew the “illicit nature” of cannabis. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. 25.10 TRAFFICKING IN COCAINE § 893.135(1)(b), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” Cocaine or any mixture containing cocaine is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of Trafficking in Cocaine, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) knowingly [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] a certain substance. 2. The substance was [cocaine] [a mixture containing cocaine]. 3. The quantity of the substance involved was 28 grams or more. See State v. Dominguez, 509 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1987) 4. (Defendant) knew that the substance was [cocaine] [a mixture containing cocaine]. If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla.Stat., the following bracketed language should be given instead of element 4 above. For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to sell heroin but actually sold cocaine, the alternate element 4 would be given. [4. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] [bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 893.135(1), Fla.Stat.) , but actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] cocaine or a mixture containing cocaine.] Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Manufacture § 893.02(12)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give only if the defendant asserts the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance – section 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. See State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1991) The punishment provided by law for the crime of Trafficking in Cocaine is greater depending on the amount of cocaine involved. Therefore, if you find the defendant guilty of trafficking in cocaine, you must determine by your verdict whether: Enhanced penalty; give if applicable up to extent of charge a. [The quantity of the substance involved was in excess of 28 grams but less than 200 grams.] b. [The quantity of the substance involved was 200 grams or more but less than 400 grams.] c. [The quantity of the substance involved was 400 grams or more but less than 150 kilograms.] d. [The quantity of the substance involved was 150 kilograms or more but less than 300 kilograms .] [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment Section 893.101(2) and (3), Florida Statutes, require the availability of the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance and the accompanying instruction on the “permissive presumption” of knowledge. Proof of the fourth element of the crime, i.e. that the defendant knew the substance was cocaine, is close to but not identical with proof that the defendant knew the “illicit nature” of cocaine. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. 25.11 TRAFFICKING IN ILLEGAL DRUGS § 893.135(1)(c), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” (Specific substance alleged) or any mixture containing (specific substance alleged) is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of Trafficking in Illegal Drugs, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) knowingly [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] a certain substance. 2. The substance was [(specific substance alleged)] [a mixture containing (specific substance alleged) ]. 3. The quantity of the substance involved was 28 4 grams or more. See State v. Dominguez, 509 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1987) 4. (Defendant) knew that the substance was [(specific substance alleged)] [a mixture containing (specific substance alleged) ]. If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla.Stat., the following bracketed language should be given instead of element 4 above. For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to sell heroin but actually sold (specific substance alleged), the alternate element 4 would be given. [4. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] [bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 893.135(1), Fla.Stat.) , but actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] (specific substance alleged) or a mixture containing (specific substance alleged).] Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Manufacture § 893.02(12)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give only if the defendant asserts the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance — section 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. See State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1991) The punishment provided by law for the crime of Trafficking in Illegal Drugs is greater depending on the amount of (specific substance alleged) involved. Therefore, if you find the defendant guilty of trafficking in illegal drugs, you must determine by your verdict whether: Enhanced penalty; give if applicable up to extent of charge a. [The quantity of the substance involved was in excess of 4 grams but less than 14 grams.] b. [The quantity of the substance involved was 14 grams or more but less than 28 grams.] c. [The quantity of the substance involved was 28 grams or more but less than 30 kilograms.] d. [The quantity of the substance involved was 30 kilograms or more but less than 60 kilograms .] [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no chart] Comment Section 893.101(2) and (3), Florida Statutes, require the availability of the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance and the accompanying instruction on the “permissive presumption” of knowledge. Proof of the fourth element of the crime, i.e. that the defendant knew the identity of the specific substance alleged is close to but not identical with proof that the defendant knew the “illicit nature” of the substance. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. 25.12 TRAFFICKING IN PHENCYCLIDINE § 893.135(1)(d), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” Phencyclidine or any mixture containing phencyclidine is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of Trafficking in Phencyclidine, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) knowingly [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] a certain substance. 2. The substance was [phencyclidine] [a mixture containing phencyclidine]. 3. The quantity of the substance involved was 28 grams or more. See State v. Dominguez, 509 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1987) 4. (Defendant) knew that the substance was [phencyclidine] [a mixture containing phencyclidine]. If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla.Stat., the following bracketed language should be given instead of element 4 above. For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to sell heroin but actually sold phencyclidine, the alternate element 4 would be given. [4. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] [bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 893.135(1), Fla.Stat.) , but actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] phencyclidine or a mixture containing phencyclidine.] Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Manufacture § 893.02(12)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give only if the defendant asserts the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance – § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. See State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1991) The punishment provided by law for the crime of Trafficking in Phencyclidine is greater depending on the amount of phencyclidine involved. Therefore, if you find the defendant guilty of trafficking in phencyclidine, you must determine by your verdict whether: Enhanced penalty; give if applicable up to extent of charge a. [The quantity of the substance involved was in excess of 28 grams but less than 200 grams.] b. [The quantity of the substance involved was 200 grams or more but less than 400 grams.] c. [The quantity of the substance involved was 400 grams or more but less than 800 grams .] [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment Section 893.101(2) and (3), Florida Statutes, require the availability of the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance and the accompanying instruction on the “permissive presumption” of knowledge. Proof of the fourth element of the crime, i.e. that the defendant knew the substance was phencyclidine or a mixture containing phencyclidine, is close to but not identical with proof that the defendant knew the “illicit nature” of phencyclidine. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1987, 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. 25.13 TRAFFICKING IN METHAQUALONE § 893.135(1)(e), Fla.Stat. Certain drugs and chemical substances are by law known as “controlled substances.” Methaqualone or any mixture containing methaqualone is a controlled substance. To prove the crime of Trafficking in Methaqualone, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) knowingly [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] a certain substance. 2. The substance was [methaqualone] [a mixture containing methaqualone]. 3. The quantity of the substance involved was 28 200 grams or more. See State v. Dominguez, 509 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1987) 4. (Defendant) knew that the substance was [methaqualone] [a mixture containing methaqualone]. If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla.Stat., the following bracketed language should be given instead of element 4 above. For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to sell heroin but actually sold methaqualone, the alternate element 4 would be given. [4. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] [bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 893.135(1), Fla.Stat.) , but actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] methaqualone or a mixture containing methaqualone.] Definitions; give as applicable Sell “Sell” means to transfer or deliver something to another person in exchange for money or something of value or a promise of money or something of value. Manufacture § 893.02(12)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Deliver § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Give only if the defendant asserts the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance – § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla.Stat. An issue in this case is whether (defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the substance. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance is a defense and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. Proof that the defendant actually or constructively possessed the (controlled substance alleged in the charge) may justify a finding that the defendant knew of its illicit nature if, from all the surrounding facts and circumstances, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had such knowledge. See State v. Weller, 590 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1991) The punishment provided by law for the crime of Trafficking in Methaqualone is greater depending on the amount of methaqualone involved. Therefore, if you find the defendant guilty of trafficking in methaqualone, you must determine by your verdict whether: Enhanced penalty; give if applicable up to extent of charge a. [The quantity of the substance involved was in excess of 200 grams but less than 5 kilograms.] b. [The quantity of the substance involved was 5 kilograms or more but less than 25 kilograms.] c. [The quantity of the substance involved was 25 kilograms or more but less than 50 kilograms .] [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment Section 893.101(2) and (3), Florida Statutes, require the availability of the affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance and the accompanying instruction on the “permissive presumption” of knowledge. Proof of the fourth element of the crime, i.e. that the defendant knew the substance was methaqualone, is close to but not identical with proof that the defendant knew the “illicit nature” of methaqualone. This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 , and 1997 , and 2002. 25.14 DRUG ABUSE – USE OR POSSESSION OFDRUG PARAPHERNALIA § 893.147(1), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of Use or Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) used or had in [his] [her] possession with intent to use drug paraphernalia. 2. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the drug paraphernalia. Definitions Possession To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Drug paraphernalia § 893.145, Fla.Stat. The term “drug paraphernalia” means all equipment, products, and materials of any kind which are used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, containing, concealing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance in violation of this chapter. It includes, but is not limited to: Give specific definition as applicable (1) Kits used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, or harvesting of any species of plant which is a controlled substance or from which a controlled substance can be derived. (2) Kits used, intended for use, or designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, or preparing controlled substances. (3) Isomerization devices used, intended for use, or designed for use in increasing the potency of any species of plant which is a controlled substance. (4) Testing equipment used, intended for use, or designed for use in identifying, or in analyzing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of, controlled substances. (5) Scales and balances used, intended for use, or designed for use in weighing or measuring controlled substances. (6) Diluents and adulterants, such as quinine hydrochloride, mannitol, mannite, dextrose, and lactose used, intended for use, or designed for use in cutting controlled substances. (7) Separation gins and sifters used, intended for use, or designed for use in removing twigs and seeds from, or in otherwise cleaning or refining, cannabis. (8) Blenders, bowls, containers, spoons, and mixing devices used, intended for use, or designed for use in compounding controlled substances. (9) Capsules, balloons, envelopes, and other containers used, intended for use, or designed for use in packaging small quantities of controlled substances. (10) Containers and other objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in storing or concealing controlled substances. (11) Hypodermic syringes, needles, and other objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in parenterally injecting controlled substances into the human body. (12) Objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing cannabis, cocaine, hashish, or hashish oil into the human body, such as: (a) Metal, wooden, acrylic, glass, stone, plastic, or ceramic pipes with or without screens, permanent screens, hashish heads, or punctured metal bowls. (b) Water pipes. (c) Carburetion tubes and devices. (d) Smoking and carburetion masks. (e) Roach clips: meaning objects used to hold burning material, such as a cannabis cigarette, that has become too small or too short to be held in the hand. (f) Miniature cocaine spoons, and cocaine vials. (g) Chamber pipes. (h) Carburetor pipes. (i) Electric pipes. (j) Air-driven pipes. (k) Chillums. (l) Bongs. (m) Ice pipes or chillers. Relevant factors § 893.146, Fla.Stat. In addition to all other logically relevant factors, the following factors shall be considered in determining whether an object is drug paraphernalia: (1) Statements by an owner or by anyone in control of the object concerning its use. (2) The proximity of the object, in time and space, to a direct violation of this act. (3) The proximity of the object to controlled substances. (4) The existence of any residue of controlled substances on the object. (5) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the intent of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, to deliver it to persons whom [he] [she] knows, or should reasonably know, intend to use the object to facilitate a violation of this act. The innocence of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, as to a direct violation of this act shall not prevent a finding that the object is intended for use, or designed for use, as drug paraphernalia. (6) Instructions, oral or written, provided with the object concerning its use. (7) Descriptive materials accompanying the object which explain or depict its use. (8) Any advertising concerning its use. (9) The manner in which the object is displayed for sale. (10) Whether the owner, or anyone in control of the object, is a legitimate supplier of like or related items to the community, such as a licensed distributor or dealer of tobacco products. (11) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the ratio of sales of the object or objects to the total sales of the business enterprise. (12) The existence and scope of legitimate uses for the object in the community. (13) Expert testimony concerning its use. [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989, 1992 , and 1997 , and 2002 . 25.15 DRUG ABUSE – DELIVERY, POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DELIVER, OR MANUFACTURE WITH INTENT TO DELIVER DRUG PARAPHERNALIA § 893.147(2), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of (crime charged) , the State must prove the following (applicable number) elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) [delivered] [possessed with intent to deliver] [manufactured with intent to deliver] drug paraphernalia. Give only if possession is charged 2. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the drug paraphernalia. 3. (Defendant) knew or reasonably should have known that the drug paraphernalia would be used to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body (specific substance alleged) . Definitions Possession; give if possession is charged To “possess” means to have personal charge of or exercise the right of ownership, management, or control over the thing possessed. Possession may be actual or constructive. Actual possession means (a) the thing is in the hand of or on the person, or (b) the thing is in a container in the hand of or on the person, or (c) the thing is so close as to be within ready reach and is under the control of the person. Give if applicable Mere proximity to a thing is not sufficient to establish control over that thing when the thing is not in a place over which the person has control. Constructive possession means the thing is in a place over which the person has control, or in which the person has concealed it. Give if applicable. See Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1996) If a thing is in a place over which the person does not have control, in order to establish constructive possession the State must prove the person’s (1) control over the thing , and (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person’s presence , and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing . Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly have possession of an article, exercising control over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. If a person does not have exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. Deliver; give if delivery is charged § 893.02(4), Fla.Stat. “Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Manufacture; give if manufacture is charged § 893.02(11)(a), Fla.Stat. “Manufacture” means the production, preparation, packaging, labeling or relabeling, propagation, compounding, cultivating, growing, conversion or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly. Manufacturing can be by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis. It can also be by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Drug paraphernalia § 893.145, Fla.Stat. The term “drug paraphernalia” means all equipment, products, and materials of any kind which are used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, containing, concealing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance in violation of this chapter. It includes, but is not limited to: (1) Kits used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, or harvesting of any species of plant which is a controlled substance or from which a controlled substance can be derived. (2) Kits used, intended for use, or designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, or preparing controlled substances. (3) Isomerization devices used, intended for use, or designed for use in increasing the potency of any species of plant which is a controlled substance. (4) Testing equipment used, intended for use, or designed for use in identifying, or in analyzing the strength, effectiveness, or purity of, controlled substances. (5) Scales and balances used, intended for use, or designed for use in weighing or measuring controlled substances. (6) Diluents and adulterants, such as quinine hydrochloride, mannitol, mannite, dextrose, and lactose used, intended for use, or designed for use in cutting controlled substances. (7) Separation gins and sifters used, intended for use, or designed for use in removing twigs and seeds from, or in otherwise cleaning or refining, cannabis. (8) Blenders, bowls, containers, spoons, and mixing devices used, intended for use, or designed for use in compounding controlled substances. (9) Capsules, balloons, envelopes, and other containers used, intended for use, or designed for use in packaging small quantities of controlled substances. (10) Containers and other objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in storing or concealing controlled substances. (11) Hypodermic syringes, needles, and other objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in parenterally injecting controlled substances into the human body. (12) Objects used, intended for use, or designed for use in ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing cannabis, cocaine, hashish, or hashish oil into the human body, such as: (a) Metal, wooden, acrylic, glass, stone, plastic, or ceramic pipes with or without screens, permanent screens, hashish heads, or punctured metal bowls. (b) Water pipes. (c) Carburetion tubes and devices. (d) Smoking and carburetion masks. (e) Roach clips: meaning objects used to hold burning material, such as a cannabis cigarette, that has become too small or too short to be held in the hand. (f) Miniature cocaine spoons, and cocaine vials. (g) Chamber pipes. (h) Carburetor pipes. (i) Electric pipes. (j) Air-driven pipes. (k) Chillums. (l) Bongs. (m) Ice pipes or chillers. Relevant factors § 893.146, Fla.Stat. In addition to all other logically relevant factors, the following factors shall be considered in determining whether an object is drug paraphernalia: (1) Statements by an owner or by anyone in control of the object concerning its use. (2) The proximity of the object, in time and space, to a direct violation of this act. (3) The proximity of the object to controlled substances. (4) The existence of any residue of controlled substances on the object. (5) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the intent of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, to deliver it to persons whom [he] [she] knows, or should reasonably know, intend to use the object to facilitate a violation of this act. The innocence of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, as to a direct violation of this act shall not prevent a finding that the object is intended for use, or designed for use, as drug paraphernalia. (6) Instructions, oral or written, provided with the object concerning its use. (7) Descriptive materials accompanying the object which explain or depict its use. (8) Any advertising concerning its use. (9) The manner in which the object is displayed for sale. (10) Whether the owner, or anyone in control of the object, is a legitimate supplier of like or related items to the community, such as a licensed distributor or dealer of tobacco products. (11) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the ratio of sales of the object or objects to the total sales of the business enterprise. (12) The existence and scope of legitimate uses for the object in the community. (13) Expert testimony concerning its use. [Lesser Included Offenses chart has no changes] Comment This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989, and 1997 , and 2002. The latest changes are in response to Chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which created section 893.101, Florida Statutes. 2. New instructions for lewd and lascivious conduct Note: Current instruction 11.10 is to be deleted, and the following instructions are proposed new instructions. LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS BATTERY § 800.04(4)(a), Fla.Stat. – (Engaging in Sexual Activity) To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious battery, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Victim) was twelve years of age or older, but under the age of sixteen years. 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.] “Union” means contact. However, any act done for bona fide medical purposes is not a lewd or lascivious battery. Neither the victim’s lack of chastity nor the victim’s consent is a defense to the crime charged. LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS BATTERY § 800.04(4)(b), Fla.Stat. – (Encouraging, Forcing or Enticing) T o prove the crime of lewd or lascivious battery, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Victim) was under the age of sixteen years. 2. (Defendant) [encouraged] [forced] [enticed] (victim) to engage in [sadomasochistic abuse] [sexual bestiality] [prostitution] [any act involving sexual activity]. “Sexual activity” means the oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose. “Union” means contact. “Sadomasochistic abuse” means flagellation or torture by or upon a person, or the condition of being fettered, bound, or otherwise physically restrained, for the purpose of deriving sexual satisfaction from inflicting harm on another or receiving such harm oneself. Note: Definition from § 827.071(d), Fla.Stat., Sexual Performance by a Child, and from § 847.001(13), Fla.Stat., regarding obscenity. “Sexual bestiality” means any sexual act between a person and an animal involving the sex organ of the one and the mouth, anus, or vagina of the other. Note: Definition from § 827.071(d), Fla.Stat., Sexual Performance by Child, and from § 847.001(13), Fla.Stat., regarding obscenity. LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS MOLESTATION § 800.04(5), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious molestation, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Victim) was under the age of sixteen years. 2. a. [ (Defendant) intentionally touched in a lewd or lascivious manner the [breasts] [genitals] [genital area] [buttocks] [clothing covering the breasts] [clothing covering the genitals] [clothing covering the genital area] [clothing covering the buttocks] of (victim). ] b. [( Defendant) [forced] [enticed] (victim) to touch the [breasts] [genitals] [genital area] [buttocks] [clothing covering the breasts] [clothing covering the genitals] [clothing covering the genital area] [clothing covering the buttocks] of (defendant). ] The words “lewd” and “lascivious” mean the same thing and mean a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious, or sensual intent on the part of the person doing an act. Neither the victim’s lack of chastity nor the victim’s consent is a defense to the crime charged. The punishment provided by law for the crime of lewd or lascivious molestation is greater depending on the age of the defendant and the age of the victim. Therefore, if you find the defendant is guilty of lewd or lascivious molestation, you must determine by your verdict whether at the time of the offense: a. [The defendant was eighteen years of age or older and the victim was under the age of twelve years.] b. [The defendant was under the age of eighteen years and the victim was under the age of twelve years.] c. [The defendant was eighteen years of age or older and the victim was twelve years of age or older.] d. [The defendant was under the age of eighteen years and the victim was twelve years of age or older.] Note: “but under the age of sixteen years” omitted from subparagraphs c. and d. because it is included in the elements of the crime. LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS CONDUCT § 800.04(6), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious conduct, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Victim) was under the age of sixteen years. 2. a. [ (Defendant) intentionally touched (victim) in a lewd or lascivious manner.] or b. [ (Defendant) solicited (victim) to commit a lewd or lascivious act.] The words “lewd” and “lascivious” mean the same thing and mean a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious, or sensual intent on the part of the person doing an act. To “solicit” means to ask earnestly or to try to induce the person solicited to do the thing solicited. Note: Definition of “solicit” from Criminal Solicitation instruction, § 777.04(2), Fla.Stat. Neither the victim’s lack of chastity nor the victim’s consent is a defense to the crime charged. The punishment provided by law for the crime of lewd or lascivious conduct is greater depend ing on the age of the defendant. Therefore, if you find the defendant is guilty of lewd or lascivious conduct, you must determine by your verdict whether at the time of the offense: a. The defendant was eighteen years of age or older. b. The defendant was under the age of eighteen years. LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS EXHIBITION (Presence of Child) § 800.04(7)(a), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious exhibition, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Victim) was under the age of sixteen years. 2. a. [ (Defendant) intentionally masturbated.] b. [ (Defendant) intentionally exposed [his] [her] genitals in a lewd or lascivious manner.] c. [ (Defendant) committed [a sexual act] [sadomasochistic abuse] [sexual bestiality] [simulation of any act involving sexual activity] that did not involve actual physical or sexual contact with (victim) .] 3. The act was committed in the presence of (victim) . The words “lewd’ and “lascivious” mean the same thing and mean a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious, or sensual intent on the part of the person doing an act. “Sadomasochistic abuse” means flagellation or torture by or upon a person, or the condition of being fettered, bound, or otherwise physically restrained, for the purpose of deriving sexual satisfaction from inflicting harm on another or receiving such harm oneself. Note: Definition from § 827.071(d), Fla.Stat., Sexual Performance by a Child, and from § 847.001(13), Fla.Stat., regarding obscenity. “Sexual bestiality” means any sexual act between a person and an animal involving the sex organ of the one and the mouth, anus, or vagina of the other. Note: Definition from § 827.071(d), Fla.Stat., Sexual Performance by a Child, and from § 847.001(13), Fla.Stat., regarding obscenity. “Sexual activity” means the oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose. “In the presence of” means that the victim saw, heard, or otherwise sensed that the act was taking place. Note: See State v. Werner , 609 So.2d 585 (Fla. 1992). This definition was used for the instruction for Lewd, Lascivious, Indecent Assault or Act Upon or in the Presence of Child; Sexual Battery § 800.04. Neither the victim’s lack of chastity nor the victim’s consent is a defense to the crime charged. The punishment provided by law for the crime of lewd or lascivious exhibition is greater depending on the age of the defendant. Therefore, if you find the defendant is guilty of lewd or lascivious exhibition, you must determine by your verdict whether at the time of the offense: a. The defendant was eighteen years of age or older. b. The defendant was under the age of eighteen years. LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS EXHIBITION (Over Computer Service) § 800.04(7)(b ), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious exhibition, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Victim) was under the age of sixteen years. 2. a. [ (Defendant) intentionally masturbated.] b. [ (Defendant) intentionally exposed [his] [her] genitals in a lewd or lascivious manner.] c. [ (Defendant) committed [a sexual act] [sadomasochistic abuse] [sexual bestiality] [simulation of any act involving sexual activity] that did not involve actual physical or sexual contact with (victim) .] 3. The act was committed live over a [computer on-line service] [internet service] [local bulletin board service]. 4. (Defendant) [knew] [should have known] [had reason to believe] that the transmission was viewed on a computer or television monitor by a victim in this state who was under the age of sixteen years. The words “lewd” and “lascivious” mean the same thing and mean a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious, or sensual intent on the part of the person doing an act. “Sadomasochistic abuse” means flagellation or torture by or upon a person, or the condition of being fettered, bound, or otherwise physically restrained, for the purpose of deriving sexual satisfaction from inflicting harm on another or receiving such harm oneself. Note: Definition from § 827.071(d), Fla.Stat., Sexual Performance by a Child, and from § 847.001(13), Fla.Stat., regarding obscenity. “Sexual bestiality” means any sexual act between a person and an animal involving the sex organ of the one and the mouth, anus, or vagina of the other. Note: Definition from § 827.071(d), Fla.Stat., Sexual Performance by a Child, and from § 847.001(13), Fla.Stat., regarding obscenity. “Sexual activity” means the oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose. Neither the victim’s lack of chastity nor the victim’s consent is a defense to the crime charged. The fact that an undercover operative or law enforcement officer was involved in the detection and investigation of an offense is not a defense to the crime charged. The punishment provided by law for the crime of lewd or lascivious exhibition is greater depending on the age of the defendant. Therefore, if you find the defendant is guilty of lewd or lascivious exhibition, you must determine by your verdict whether at the time of the offense: a. The defendant was eighteen years of age or older. b. The defendant was under the age of eighteen years. Notice: Proposed civil jury instructions September 15, 2002 Noticescenter_img Notice: Proposed civil jury instructionslast_img read more

Continue Reading

In Practice

first_img Be careful using form real estate contracts James W. Martin Florida lawyers frequently use the real estate sales contract forms sold by The Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Realtors, commonly known as the FAR/Bar and FAR contract forms. Both contract forms include a default clause that allows a nonbreaching seller a choice of remedies: retain the buyer’s deposit or pursue other remedies.An April 2004 First District Court of Appeal opinion found such a clause to be invalid and required the seller to return the deposit based on a 1991 Florida Supreme Court opinion holding the essentially identical clause to impose an unlawful penalty rather than liquidated damages because the seller cannot have the right to choose between liquidated damages and suing for damages.Some of the same wording appears in the current FAR/Bar and FAR contract forms, although the language is a bit varied. Whether a court will hold the specific default clause in those contract forms to be invalid remains to be seen, but the cautious practitioner will consider revising the default clause to delete the seller’s choice and instead provide either the remedy of retaining the deposit or the remedy of suing for damages or specific performance under the contract.The recent First District case is Cloud v. Schenck, 2004 Fla. App. Lexis 4550, Case No. 1D03-2023 (Fla. 1st DCA, April 6, 2004), and its default clause reads as follows: “If BUYER fails to perform this contract within the time specified, the deposit paid by BUYER may be retained by or for the account of SELLER as agreed upon liquidated damages, consideration for the execution of this contract and in full settlement of any claims; whereupon BUYER and SELLER shall be relieved of all obligations under contract; OR SELLER at SELLER’s option, may proceed to enforce SELLER’s rights under this contract.”The 1991 Florida Supreme Court case is Lefemine v. Baron, 573 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 1991), and its default clause reads as follows: “If Buyer fails to perform the Contract within the time specified, the deposit(s) made or agreed to be made by Buyer may be retained or recovered by or for the account of Seller as liquidated damages, consideration for the execution of the Contract and in full settlement of any claims; whereupon all parties shall be relieved of all obligations under the Contract; or Seller, at his option, may proceed at law or in equity to enforce his rights under the Contract.”The current FAR/Bar contract default clause reads as follows: “If Buyer fails to perform this Contract within the time specified, including payment of all deposits, the deposit(s) paid by Buyer and deposit(s) agreed to be paid, may be recovered and retained by and for the account of Seller as agreed upon liquidated damages, consideration for the execution of this Contract and in full settlement of any claims; whereupon, Buyer and Seller shall be relieved of all obligations under this Contract; or Seller, at Seller’s option, may proceed in equity to enforce Seller’s rights under this Contract.”As one can see, the 1991 contract form allowed the seller the option of keeping the deposit or suing “at law or in equity,” which meant the seller had a choice of keeping the deposit or suing for damages. The current FAR/Bar form omits the remedy of suing “at law” and leaves only the remedy of suing in equity (specific performance, rather than damages). Thus, the current FAR/Bar contract form seems to pass muster with the test in Lefemine and, therefore, the test in Cloud. Unfortunately for the seller in the recent Cloud case, the clause in that case does not limit the seller to its rights in equity.The Cloud case is a friendly reminder for Florida lawyers that forms are just the starting point; the lawyer must exercise independent professional judgment when using them. James W. Martin is a corporate, real estate, and probate lawyer in St. Petersburg, who has written for Florida Bar Journal and News , ALI-ABA Practical Lawyer, and West Publishing, and has more information on his Web site, www.jamesmartinpa.com. May 1, 2004 Regular News In Practicelast_img read more

Continue Reading

Briefs

first_imgEach year in Broward County more than 6,500 people charged with traffic violations beat the system because arresting officers don’t make it to trial.That prompted County Court Clerk Howard Forman to launch a new computerized court calendar system to coordinate the appearances of all law enforcement agencies. Forman said it should reduce the number of cases that are tossed out.The Web-based program for coordinating schedules of the court dockets and the arresting officers from agencies includes the police departments of 16 municipalities, 18 Broward sheriff districts, and the Florida Highway Patrol.The system, created by Infocom Systems and called the Judicial Automated Court Scheduling (JACS) Module, applies just to traffic court, not criminal court, proceedings. It is hoped the program will reduce scheduling conflicts between the court docket and officers’ availabilities, and reduce the need and costs for rescheduling hearings.Here is how it works: At each of the law enforcement agencies, no more than two supervisors will be trained to input officer schedules. The individual officers will not be able to access the system. At the same time, the docket supervisors in the Office of the Clerk of the Court load in the cases that need to go to trial. The system will then set a trial date within the 180-day limit and coordinate it with the availability of the law enforcement officer who issued the ticket. Ultimately, schedules for 3,000 officers will be tracked by the system, which costs about $470,000. Forman said it is anticipated that costs will be recaptured by the enhanced efficiency of the traffic ticket process. On an average day, 400 traffic pre-trial and trial hearings are held at each of the county’s four courthouse locations.Orange County honors bro bono volunteers Animal law Committee gets okayed The 19th Circuit Judicial Nominating Commission is now accepting applications for a circuit judge position.Applicants must be a registered voter, live within the 19th Circuit, and have been a member of The Florida Bar for the past five years.Applications may be downloaded from The Florida Bar’s Web site at www.flabar.org or pick them up from the office of Nita Denton, JNC Chair, at 100 E. Ocean Blvd, Ste 400, Stuart 34994. The applications may be obtained from Denton’s office anytime between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday.An original plus a copy must be received by Denton and one copy delivered to each member of the JNC by September 10 at noon. Briefs Creation of a new Animal Law Committee for The Florida Bar and the renewal of the Education Law Committee have been approved by the Board of Governors.The board acted on the recommendation of the Program Evaluation Committee at its August 13 meeting.PEC Chair Richard Tanner said the committee’s recommendation for the Animal Law Committee came after a careful review and assurances that the committee will not be a platform for lobbying animal rights matters.There is a whole area of animal law, ranging from veterinary matters to estate planning, he said, and the committee will be focused on those issues. He said the recommendation was to approved the new panel as an interim committee, which means the PEC will review it after one year, instead of the normal three-year review for new sections and committees.The board approved the committee’s recommendation.On the Education Law Committee, Tanner said the PEC was satisfied the group was fulfilling its functions, although it had suffered a decline in membership. The board, on the PEC’s recommendation, also approved the continuation of that panel.On other matters, Tanner said the PEC was reviewing Board of Legal Specialization and Education operations, and was recommending a minor change in how CLE courses are classified as advanced, intermediate, or beginner. The board approved that change.The committee also completed its review of the Clients’ Security Fund and found it operating well with no need for changes, Tanner said.Board member Henry Latimer asked if the PEC was looking at the diversity of certification committees as part of its BLSE reviews. He noted there is a lack of women and minority lawyers on many of those committees. Bar President Kelly Overstreet Johnson said the Bar needs to encourage more women and minorities to become certified so there is a bigger pool of applicants for those committees.Board member Mike Glazer, chair of the Communications Committee, said that panel is also looking at that issue.Personal solicitation of storm victims is a Bar rules violation The Bar’s Young Lawyers Division is now accepting nominations for its YLD Pro Bono Award.The Florida Bar YLD Pro Bono Award recognizes public service or legal aid performed by a young lawyer (under the age of 36 or one who has not practiced for more than five years in any jurisdiction) who provides outstanding contributions to those in need of free legal services.The purpose of this award is to encourage more Florida young lawyers to freely contribute their time and expertise in providing legal services to people in their community who cannot otherwise afford those services. In some instances, this will include legal services to charitable organizations which serve the poor. The award is intended to provide recognition to young lawyers who have made an outstanding contribution in this area. The emphasis of these awards is on legal services to the poor.Nomination forms may be found on the YLD Web site at www.flayld.org/Scholarships/probonoawards.htm and nominations must be submitted on or before October 15 to The Florida Bar, Austin Newberry, Young Lawyers Division Program Administrator, 651 E. Jefferson Street, Tallahassee 32399-2300.19th JNC seeks judge applicants The Bar’s Education Law Committee will present a CLE program September 10 at the Tampa Airport Marriott beginning at 1:30 p.m., immediately following the committee’s business meeting.The presentors will include Bob Minnix, associate athletic director for compliance at Florida State University, who is responsible for overseeing the Department of Athletics compliance issues. Also Luis “Tony” A. Cabassa will be making a presentation on the Fair Labor Standards Act and regulations and their impact on educational entities, and Daniel Woodring, general counsel for the Department of Education, will discuss the new Florida education system. Woodring is responsible for providing legal advice and representation to the State Board of Education, the Florida Board of Governors, the commissioner of education, and the Department of Education.“Education Law Committee members should find these presentations very beneficial to their practice,” said Committee Chair Virginia Tanner-Otts.The committee’s business meeting and CLE presentations are offered at no cost to members or guests. E-mail anewberry@flabar.org. for more information.Citizens Forum to help out with Bar Communications The Communications Committee is looking at ways to better utilize the Bar’s Citizens Forum, a mostly nonlawyer group that reviews and advises on Bar-related activities.Glazer told the Board of Governors at its Ponte Vedra Beach meeting that the Bar is always looking to get feedback from residents about law- related issues, ranging from lawyer advertising to merit selection, and the forum is an excellent way to get that.The Communications Committee is asking the forum to review the Bar’s Advertising Task Force 2004, which is reviewing Bar advertising rules, and the Clients Security Fund.“We think they are an underutilized resource and we want to work more closely with them and take more issues to them,” Glazer said.On other matters, Glazer said final details have been worked out for a promotion campaign for the certification programs run by the Board of Legal Specialization and Education. He said BLSE funds will be used to hire a part-time contract worker who will be housed in the Bar’s Public Information and Bar Services Department and will work to increase awareness of certification among both lawyers and the public.“I’m very committed to moving that forward,” Glazer said.The committee also is continuing to audit the Bar communications activities, including its Web site, and the Bar News, Journal, and directory publications. Glazer said the main finding of the audit is that the Web site needs to be updated and redesigned to improve access and ease of use.The Bar also has hired a staffer in the public information office, Ann Baxter, whose duties include increasing and improving Hispanic media relations.Grant will assist abused women in Hillsboroughcenter_img September 1, 2004 Regular News The Hillsborough County area will receive $1.2 million in two awards from the president’s Family Justice Center Initiative, in a new pilot program to prevent and respond to violence against women, according to Tampa lawyer Michael Bedke, who spearheaded the effort to create the Hillsborough County Family Justice Center.“We are pleased and grateful that our area’s program has received this award, which will enable us to embark on this important new approach to helping the victims of domestic violence,” Bedke said. “It will save lives and help transform victims into survivors.”Of the two awards under the Family Justice Center Initiative, $1,098,000 will go to Hillsborough County and $150,000 will go to Bay Area Legal Services, Bedke said.The Family Justice Center Initiative is a new pilot program intended to make it easier for domestic violence victims to find support and aid by gathering in a single location the full array of professionals who provide them services. These include victim services advocates, law enforcement officers, civil attorneys, clergy, and others, all based under one roof. Pilot Family Justice Centers are being put in place in 15 communities across the country, and this week they received a total of $20 million in awards from the Department of Justice.Speaking in Washington, D.C., U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft said, “The Family Justice Center Initiative Awards will make a tremendous difference for women in these communities who are victimized by domestic violence, allowing those who desperately need help to find it in one place…. The Family Justice Centers will ease their burdens and demonstrate that the most compassionate way of helping victims can also be the best and most effective way.”Broward launches court scheduling for traffic cases The Legal Aid Society and the Orange County Bar Association honored the annual recipients of pro bono awards at a recent ceremony.The winners included James Magee, winner of Judge J.C.‘Jake’ Stone Distinguished Service Award; Tiffany M. Chill and Gayle A. Owens, winners of New Lawyer Awards; Mark L. Graham, winner of Government Attorney Award of Excellence; Jeannteer Churn, winner of Volunteer Advocate for Children Award; Fisher Rushmer Werrenrath Dickson Talley & Dunlap and Nebel & Bachman, winners of Law Firm Award of Merit.Individual Award winners included Joseph L. Amos, Jr., Grady G. Ayers, Craig Brams, Andrew Cameron, Mary Ann Morgan, Jon M. Oden, Leslie O’Neal-Coble, John J. Reid, and Nick Shannin.Nominees sought for YLD pro bono award Board of Governors also renews Education Law Committee Florida lawyers are being strongly cautioned against engaging in solicitation of hurricane victims.Solicitation, whether by the lawyer personally or by someone else on behalf of the lawyer, is prohibited by Rule 4-7.4(a), according to Elizabeth Tarbert, the Bar’s ethics counsel.“Solicitation includes any direct contact face-to-face, by telephone, by fax or telegraph,” Tarbert said. “It includes passing out business cards or other law firm information.”Lawyers also cannot mail solicitations within 30 days of the disaster, according to Rule 4-7.4(b)(1)(A). Any direct mail solicitations must comply with Rules 4-7.2 and 4-7.4(b) and must be filed with The Florida Bar for review.“I would caution lawyers not to in-person solicit victims, including sending runners,” Tarbert said, noting that a Florida lawyer was suspended for one year for in-person solicitation in the wake of the tornados that hit the Orlando area a few years ago ( TFB v. Wolfe, 759 So.2d 639 (Fla. 2000), Tarbert also said fees from solicitation, as with any form of advertising that does not comply with the rules, are also subject to forfeiture.Tarbert noted, however, volunteer lawyers offering their services to accident victims at no charge do not violate the anti-solicitation rule.Tarbert said it is her office’s position that if attorneys are simply advertising that their offices are open, or where they are practicing, that doesn’t have to be submitted for review.“We view that more in the nature of a client service — informing their existing clients where they are located and how they can be contacted,” Tarbert said. “The rules would still apply if they are advertising for the purpose of offering legal services to new clients.”It is also anticipated some lawyers will directly advertise toward other lawyers, saying, “We lost all our records, and if you were on the opposite side of any cases we were on, would you please make copies of your records available to us.”Those ads also would fall outside the usual ad review process, Tarbert said.“Anyone with information that a lawyer is engaging in solicitation should report the lawyer to The Florida Bar,” Tarbert said.Questions or complaints about a lawyer’s conduct can be made toll free to (800) 342-8060, ext. 5839, or contact the closest Bar branch office. Lawyers with questions concerning whether their own future conduct violates Bar rules may call 1-800-235-8619.Education Law Committee sets September 10th CLE programlast_img read more

Continue Reading