Title: In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC13-1733 
____________ 
 
 
 IN RE:  STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES—
REPORT NO. 2013-05. 
 
[December 11, 2014] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal 
Cases (Committee) has submitted proposed changes to the standard jury 
instructions and asks that the Court authorize the amended standard instructions for 
publication and use.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. 
 
In 2013, this Court authorized for publication and use amended Standard 
Criminal Jury Instructions 25.9–25.13, which pertain to various drug trafficking 
offenses.  See In re Std. Jury Instrs. in Crim. Cases—Instrs. 25.9–25.13, 112 So. 3d 
1211 (Fla. 2013).  In our opinion in that case, we asked the Committee to “review 
jury instructions 25.2–25.8 and make a recommendation to the Court whether any 
amendments to those instructions are warranted in light of the Court’s decision 
 
2 
 
here, or in light of [State v.] Adkins [96 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 2012).]”1  We also asked 
the Committee for a recommendation as to “whether instructions 25.9–25.13 
should be amended in light of Smith v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 714 (2013).”  In re 
Std. Jury Instrs. in Crim. Cases, 112 So. 3d at 1212.2  In response to our requests 
for recommendations on these points, the Committee has filed the current report 
proposing further amendments to the aforementioned instructions, proposing 
amendments to other standard instructions pertaining to drug offenses, and 
proposing two entirely new instructions.  This Court directed that the proposals be 
published in The Florida Bar News.  No comments have been filed with the Court 
in response to publication. 
 
The Committee’s proposed changes affect the following existing criminal 
jury instructions:  25.2 (Drug Abuse—Sale, Purchase, Manufacture, Delivery, or 
                                          
 
 
1.  In State v. Adkins, this Court found that section 893.101, Florida Statutes 
(2011), had “expressly eliminate[d] knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled 
substance as an element of controlled substance offenses and expressly create[d] an 
affirmative defense of lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance.”  96 
So. 3d at 416 (plurality opinion with three justices concurring and two justices 
concurring in result).  The Court upheld the statute as constitutional against a facial 
due process challenge.  Id. at 412, 423 (plurality opinion with three justices 
concurring and two justices concurring in result).  
 
2.  In Smith v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held, in a 
case involving a charge of criminal conspiracy where the defendant claimed to 
have withdrawn from the conspiracy, that there was no violation of due process in 
placing the burden of proving withdrawal on the defendant.  133 S. Ct. at 720-21. 
 
3 
 
Possession with Intent); 25.3 (Drug Abuse—Sale, Purchase, Delivery, or 
Possession in Excess of Ten Grams); 25.4 (Drug Abuse—Delivery to or Use of 
Minor); 25.5 (Drug Abuse—Bringing into State); 25.6 (Drug Abuse—Contraband 
in Specified Locations); 25.7 (Drug Abuse—Possession); 25.8 (Drug Abuse—
Obtaining Controlled Substance by Fraud, etc.); 25.9 (Trafficking in Cannabis); 
25.10 (Trafficking in Cocaine); 25.11 (Trafficking in Morphine, Opium, 
Oxycodone, Hydrocodone, Hydromorphone, [or] Heroin); 25.12 (Trafficking in 
Phencyclidine); 25.13 (Trafficking in Methaqualone); 25.14 (Drug Abuse—Use or 
Possession of Drug Paraphernalia); 25.15 (Drug Abuse—Delivery, Possession with 
Intent to Deliver, or Manufacture with Intent to Deliver Drug Paraphernalia); 25.16 
(Drug Abuse—Delivery of Drug Paraphernalia to a Minor); 25.17 (Contraband in 
County Detention Facility); and 25.18 (Contraband in Juvenile Facility).  The 
Committee proposes that we also authorize for publication and use the following 
new instructions:  25.20 (Possession of Contraband in or Upon the Grounds of a 
State Correctional Institution); and 25.21 (Introduction or Removal of Contraband 
into or from a State Correctional Institution).  We authorize the proposed amended 
and new instructions for publication and use except as noted below. 
 
In its report, the Committee states that it found the law was uncertain on the 
issue of whether “knowledge of presence” is a required element of certain drug 
offenses.  With respect to certain offenses, the Committee found that “knowledge 
 
4 
 
of presence” may or may not be an element.  The Committee proposes to address 
this uncertainty by including optional instructions along with notes and comments 
to explain the issue. 
Currently, Instruction 25.2 (Sale, Purchase, Manufacture, Delivery, or 
Possession with Intent) lists the following as element 3: “Defendant had 
knowledge of the presence of the substance,” preceded by an advisory note saying, 
“Give if possession is charged.”  The Committee proposes to change the advisory 
note to read: “Give element #3 if Possession with Intent to Sell, Purchase, 
Manufacture or Deliver is charged.  It is unclear whether element #3 must be given 
for Sale, Manufacture, Delivery, or Purchase of a Controlled Substance.  See 
Comment section.”   
Current Instruction 25.3 (Sale, Purchase, Delivery, or Possession in Excess 
of Ten Grams) includes as element 3, “Defendant had knowledge of the presence 
of the substance,” preceded by a note saying, “Give if possession is charged.”  The 
Committee proposes to change the note to read: “Give element #3 if possession is 
charged.  It is unclear whether element #3 must be given for Sale, Purchase, or 
Delivery of a controlled substance.  See Comment section.”  
Instruction 25.4 (Delivery to or Use of a Minor) does not currently include 
“knowledge of presence” as an element.  The Committee proposes to add it as 
element 4, reading, “Defendant had knowledge of the presence of the substance,” 
 
5 
 
preceded by a note saying, “It is unclear whether element #4 must be given for 
Delivery of a Controlled Substance.  See Comment section.” 
Instruction 25.5 (Bringing into State) currently includes as element 3: 
“Defendant had knowledge of the presence of the substance.”  The Committee 
proposes adding a note preceding element 3 reading, “It is unclear whether element 
#3 must be given.  See Comment section.” 
Instruction 25.6 (Contraband in Specified Locations) currently includes as 
element 4: “Defendant had knowledge of the presence of the substance.”  The 
Committee proposes to add the following advisory notes: “Give element #4 if 
Possession with Intent to Sell, Manufacture or Deliver is charged.  It is unclear 
whether element #4 must be given for Sale, Manufacture, or Delivery of a 
Controlled Substance.  See Comment section.” 
With some variations in the language, the Committee proposes adding 
comments to all five of the above-listed instructions explaining the issue as 
follows:    
Unlike the trafficking statutes, the statutes for these crimes do 
not contain the word “knowingly.”  Also, the affirmative defense 
statute of section 893.101, Florida Statutes, addresses only 
“knowledge of illicit nature” and not “knowledge of presence.”  
Because of case law, “knowledge of presence” is an element of 
possession, which is why [an instruction on knowledge of presence] 
must be given if the defendant is charged with [possession or 
possession with intent]. See State v. Oxx, 417 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 5th 
DCA 1982).  However, there is an absence of case law as to whether 
“knowledge of presence” is an element of [other offenses covered by 
 
6 
 
these five instructions] or whether “lack of knowledge of presence” is 
an affirmative defense. In the absence of case law, trial judges must 
decide this issue. 
 
We decline to authorize the Committee’s proposed amendments to these five 
instructions insofar as the treatment of “knowledge of presence” is concerned.  
 
In State v. Adkins, 96 So. 3d at 414-16, this Court addressed a facial 
challenge to the constitutionality of section 893.101, Florida Statutes (2011).3  The 
                                          
 
 
3.  As currently codified the statute is identical.  See § 893.101, Fla. Stat. 
(2014).  This statute was created by chapter 2002-258, Laws of Florida, which 
provided: 
 
Section 1.  Section 893.101, Florida Statutes, is created to read: 
 
893.101  Legislative findings and intent.— 
 
(1)  The Legislature finds that the cases of Scott v. State, [808 
So. 2d 166] (Fla. 2002), and Chicone v. State, 684 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 
1996), holding that the state must prove that the defendant knew of 
the illicit nature of a controlled substance found in his or her actual or 
constructive possession, were contrary to legislative intent. 
(2)  The Legislature finds that knowledge of the illicit nature of 
a controlled substance is not an element of any offense under this 
chapter. Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled 
substance is an affirmative defense to the offenses of this chapter. 
(3)  In those instances in which a defendant asserts the 
affirmative defense described in this section, the possession of a 
controlled substance, whether actual or constructive, shall give rise to 
a permissive presumption that the possessor knew of the illicit nature 
of the substance.  It is the intent of the Legislature that, in those cases 
where such an affirmative defense is raised, the jury shall be 
instructed on the permissive presumption provided in this subsection. 
 
 
7 
 
lower court had held that the statute’s purported elimination of the requirement of 
knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance as an element of offenses 
under chapter 893, Florida Statutes (2011), was a violation of the requirements of 
due process of law under the United States and Florida Constitutions.  This Court 
reversed that decision.  See Adkins, 96 So. 3d at 412, 423.  In its analysis of the 
constitutionality of 893.101, the plurality opinion said, “The statute does not 
eliminate the element of knowledge of the presence of the substance . . . .”  Id. at 
416.  An opinion concurring in result found that the statute “continue[d] to require 
the State to prove that a defendant had knowledge of the presence of the controlled 
substance as an element of drug-related offenses.”  Id. at 424 (Pariente, J., 
concurring in result).  The effect of section 893.101 was to exclude “knowledge of 
the illicit nature of a controlled substance” as an element of “any offense under this 
chapter.”  In Adkins, in the process of finding the statute constitutional, a majority 
of the Court found that “knowledge of the presence” continued to be an element of 
drug-related offenses.  More recently, the Court observed:   
In Adkins, a majority of the Court held that the guilty knowledge 
element, in light of the express language in section 893.101, Florida 
Statutes (2011), is limited to knowledge of the presence of the 
substance sold, purchased, manufactured, delivered, or brought into 
the state.  [96 So. 3d] at 423.  Knowledge of the illicit nature of the 
controlled substance is, under the statute, an affirmative defense.   
 
In re Std. Jury Instrs. in Crim. Cases—Instrs. 25.9–25.13, 112 So. 3d 1211, 1211 
(Fla. 2013). 
 
8 
 
 
 
We agree with the Committee that the issue of whether knowledge of the 
presence of the controlled substance is an element of a given offense may be a 
legal issue that must be decided based on the provisions of the particular statute, 
court decisions applying the statutes, and the circumstances of the case.  But we do 
not agree that trial judges should be told that under certain circumstances the lack 
of knowledge of the presence of the substance should be treated as an affirmative 
defense.  This is contrary to what we said in Adkins and In re Standard Jury 
Instructions.  We therefore do not authorize those parts of the proposed 
amendments that address the treatment of “knowledge of presence” by indicating 
that under certain circumstances lack of knowledge of presence may be an 
affirmative defense.  The notes and comments proposed by the Committee that 
address this point are not authorized for publication.4 
 
With the changes noted above, we authorize the amended instructions for 
publication and use as set forth in the appendix.  New language is indicated by 
underlining, and deleted language is indicated by struck-through type.5  In 
                                          
 
 
4.  With respect to Instruction 25.4 (Delivery to or Use of Minor), we 
authorize the amendment adding “knowledge of presence” as an element, but not 
the explanatory note or the comment. 
 
5.  The amendments as reflected in the appendix are to the Criminal Jury 
Instructions as they appear on the Court’s website at 
www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/instructions.shtml.  We recognize 
that there may be minor discrepancies between the instructions as they appear on 
 
9 
 
authorizing the publication and use of these instructions, we express no opinion on 
their correctness and remind all interested parties that this authorization forecloses 
neither requesting additional or alternative instructions nor contesting the legal 
correctness of the instructions.  We further caution all interested parties that any 
comments associated with the instructions reflect only the opinion of the 
Committee and are not necessarily indicative of the views of this Court as to their 
correctness or applicability.  The amended instructions as set forth in the appendix 
shall be effective when this opinion becomes final. 
 
It is so ordered. 
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED. 
 
Original Proceedings – Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in 
Criminal Cases  
 
 
 
 
                                          
 
the website and the published versions of the instructions.  Any discrepancies as to 
instructions authorized for publication and use after October 25, 2007, should be 
resolved by reference to the published opinion of this Court authorizing the 
instruction. 
 
 
 
10 
 
Judge Jerri Lynn Collins, Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury 
Instructions in Criminal Cases, Sanford, Florida, and Judge Joseph Anthony 
Bulone, Past Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in 
Criminal Cases, Clearwater, Florida, and Bart Neil Schneider, Staff Liaison, Office 
of the States Court Administrator, Tallahassee, Florida,  
 
for Petitioner 
 
 
11 
 
APPENDIX 
 
25.2 DRUG ABUSE – SALE, PURCHASE, MANUFACTURE, DELIVERY, 
OR POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO SELL, PURCHASE, 
MANUFACTURE, OR DELIVER 
§ 893.13(1)(a) and (2)(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] [manufactured] [delivered] [purchased]      
[possessed with intent to [sell] [manufacture] [deliver] [purchase]] 
a certain substance.  
 
 
 
[sold] 
 
 
[purchased] 
 
 
[manufactured] 
 
 
[delivered] 
 
 
[possessed with intent to sell] 
 
 
[possessed with 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. 
 
Delivery of 20 Grams or Less of Cannabis without consideration is a 
misdemeanor. See § 893.13(3), Fla. Stat. If the State charges the felony of Delivery 
of More Than 20 Grams of Cannabis, the jury must make a finding as to the 
weight. 
 
3. or 4.  The cannabis weighed more than 20 grams.  
 
 
Definitions.  Give as applicable. 
 
12 
 
 
Cannabis. § § § 893.02(3); 893.13(3); 893.13(6)(b), Fla. Stats. 
 
Cannabis means all parts of any plant of the genus Cannabis, whether 
growing or not and the seeds thereof. 
 
 
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(13)(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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and : 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person,  
          or 
 
13 
 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance, the controlled substance is in a place over which the (defendant) 
person has control, and the person has the ability to control the substance or 
in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
14 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
substance and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over 
the place where the substance was located, and the substance was located in a 
common area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable. § 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to (crime 
charged).  (Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense. However, y  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) [he] [she] knew 
 
15 
 
of the presence of the controlled substance and exercised control or ownership 
over the substance.was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of (crime charged). 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of (crime charged). 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
 
 
SALE, PURCHASE, MANUFACTURE, DELIVERY OR POSSESSION 
WITH INTENT— 893.13(1)(a) and (2)(a) 
CATEGORY 
ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. INS. 
NO. 
None 
Possession of 
a Controlled 
Substance, if  
Possession 
With Intent is 
charged 
 
893.13(6) 
25.7 
Delivery of 20 
Grams or Less 
of Cannabis if 
Delivery of 
More than 20 
Grams of 
Cannabis is 
charged  
 
893.13(3) 
25.2 
 
Attempt, except when delivery is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
If delivery of cannabis is charged 
893.13(3) 
 
 
If possession of cannabis is charged 
893.13(6)(b) 
 
 
16 
 
 
Comment 
 
If the State alleges the defendant possessed cannabis, in an amount more 
than 20 grams, with intent to sell, purchase, deliver, or manufacture the cannabis, 
there will be both a felony necessary lesser-included offense of simple possession 
and a misdemeanor lesser-included offense of simple possession. See Note §§  
893.13(3) and 893.13(6)(b), Fla. Stat., if the charge involves possession or delivery 
without consideration of not more than 20 grams of cannabis.   
 
 
If the State alleges the defendant possessed a controlled substance listed in   
§ 893.03(1)(c)46.-50., 114.-142., 151.-159, or 166.-169., in an amount more than 3 
grams, there will be both a felony necessary lesser-included offense of simple 
possession and a misdemeanor necessary lesser-included offense of simple 
possession. See § 893.13(6)(b).   
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in § 893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to 
another.   
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also 
SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.3 DRUG ABUSE – SALE, PURCHASE, DELIVERY, OR POSSESSION 
IN EXCESS OF TEN GRAMS 
§ 893.13(1)(b), (2)(b), and (6)(c), 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: 
 
 
If possession is charged and offense would 
be a second degree felony under 
893.13(1)(a)1 
893.13(6)(a) 
 
 
17 
 
1. 
(Defendant) [sold] [purchased] [delivered] [possessed] a certain  
substance that weighed more than 10 grams.  
 
 
 
 
[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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and : 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
 
18 
 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
19 
 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
substance and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over 
the place where the substance was located, and the substance was located in a 
common area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable.§ 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to (crime 
charged).  (Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense. However, y  
 
20 
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) [he] [she] knew 
of the presence of the controlled substance and exercised control or ownership 
over the substance.was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of (crime charged). 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of (crime charged). 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
SALE, PURCHASE, DELIVERY,OR POSSESSION OF MORE THAN IN 
EXCESS OF 10 GRAMS — 893.13(1)(b), (2)(b), and (6)(c) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. 
STAT. 
INS. 
NO. 
Sale, purchase, or delivery 
of controlled substance if 
sale, purchase, or delivery 
is charged 
 
893.13(1)(a) 
and (2)(a) 
25.2 
Possession of a controlled 
substance, if possession is 
charged 
 
893.13(6) 
25.7 
 
Attempt, except when 
delivery is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
If possession is charged 
893.13(6)(a)  
 
Comment  
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in § 893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to 
another.   
 
21 
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also 
SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.4 DRUG ABUSE – DELIVERY OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TO 
OR USE OF MINOR 
§ 893.13(4), 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] [four] elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
 
 
Give 1a, 1b, or 1c as applicable. 
1. 
a. 
[(Defendant) delivered a certain substance to a person under 
the age of 18 years.] 
 
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. 
 
          4.        (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. 
 
 
Definition. 
 
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. 
 
 
22 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable.§ 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to (crime 
charged).  (Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense. However, y  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) [he] [she] knew 
of the presence of the controlled substance and exercised control or ownership 
over the substance.was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of (crime charged). 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of (crime charged). 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
DELIVERY OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TO OR USE OF A 
MINOR — 893.13(4) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. 
STAT. 
INS. 
NO. 
Sale, manufacture, 
delivery, etc. Delivery of 
a Controlled Substance  
  
893.13(1)(a) 25.2 
 
Attempt, except when 
delivery is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
If possession is charged and 
the offense would be a second 
degree felony under 
893.13(1)(a)1 
893.13(6)(a)  
 
If possession of cannabis is 
charged 
893.13(6)(b)  
 
 
 
23 
 
 
If delivery of cannabis is 
charged 
893.13(3) 
 
 
Comment 
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of  
“delivery” in § 893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person 
to another.   
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 
(Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.5 DRUG ABUSE – BRINGING A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INTO 
THE STATE 
§ 893.13(5), 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) Bringing a Controlled Substance 
Into the State, the State must prove the following [two] [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.  
 
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: 
 
 
24 
 
a. 
the controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
 
b. 
the controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
 
c. 
the controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession means the controlled substance is in a place 
over which the (defendant) has control, or in which the (defendant) has 
concealed it. 
 
 
In order to establish constructive possession of a controlled substance if 
the controlled substance is in a place over which the (defendant) does not have 
control, the State must prove the (defendant’s) (1) control over the controlled 
substance and (2) knowledge that the controlled substance was within the 
(defendant’s) presence. 
 
 
Possession may be joint, that is, two or more persons may jointly possess 
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 controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable.§ 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to 
 
25 
 
Bringing a Controlled Substance Into the State.  (Defendant) has raised this 
affirmative defense. However, y  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) [he] [she] knew 
of the presence of the controlled substance and exercised control or ownership 
over the substance.was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Bringing a Controlled Substance Into the State . 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of Bringing a Controlled Substance Into the 
State. 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
BRINGING A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INTO THE STATE – 
893.13(5) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. 
STAT. 
INS. 
NO. 
Sale, manufacture, 
delivery, etc. 
 
893.13(1)(a) 25.2 
 
Attempt, except when 
delivery is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
If possession is charged and 
the offense would be a second 
degree felony under 
893.13(1)(a)1 
893.13(6)(a)  
 
If possession of cannabis is 
charged 
893.13(6)(b
) 
 
 
If delivery of cannabis is 
charged 
893.13(3) 
 
 
 
26 
 
Comment 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1997 [697 So. 2d 84] 
and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 
2004)]. 
 
25.6 DRUG ABUSE – CONTRABAND SELL, MANUFACTURE, DELIVER, 
OR POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO SELL, MANUFACTURE OR 
DELIVER A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IN SPECIFIED LOCATIONS 
§ 893.13(1)(c) – (f), and (h) 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] [four] elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) [sold] [manufactured] [delivered] [possessed with  
intent to [sell] [manufacture] [deliver]] a certain substance.  
 
[sold] 
[manufactured] 
[delivered] 
[possessed with intent to sell] 
[possessed with intent to manufacture] 
[possessed with intent to deliver] 
 
a certain substance. 
 
 
Give 2a, or 2b as applicable. § 893.13(1)(c)-(f) and (h), Fla. Stat. 
2.a.  The [sale] [manufacture] [delivery] [possession with intent  
        to [sell] [manufacture] [deliver]] took place in, on, or within 
        1,000 feet of:  
 
[the real property comprising a child care facility]; 
 
[the real property comprising a public or private [elementary], 
[middle], or [secondary] school between the hours of 6:00 a.m. 
and 12:00 midnight];.   
 
 
27 
 
[the real property comprising [a state, county, or municipal 
park] [a community center] [a publicly-owned recreational 
facility];  
 
[the real property comprising a public or private college, 
university, or other postsecondary educational institution]; 
 
 [a physical place for worship at which a church or religious     
organization regularly conducts religious services]; 
 
 [a convenience business];   
 
 [the real property comprising a public housing facility];    
 
 [the real property comprising an assisted living facility].    
 
 
§ 893.13(1)(c-f), Fla. Stat. 
b. 
in, on, or within 1000 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 state, county or municipal park] 
[a community center] [a publicly owned recreation facility] 
[a physical place for worship at which a church or religious 
organization regularly conducts religious services] [a 
convenience business]. 
 
 
3. 
The substance was (specific substance alleged). 
 
 
4. 
(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(13)(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.  
 
28 
 
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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and : 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
 
29 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
 
30 
 
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
     you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the 
substance and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
substance and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over 
the place where the substance was located, and the substance was located in a 
common area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Definitions.  Give as applicable. 
 
Child care facility. § 402.302 Fla. Stat.  
 
“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. 
 
 
Convenience business. § 812.171 Fla. Stat. 
 
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] [her] family work between 
the hours of 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. 
 
 
Real property comprising a public housing facility. § 421.03(12) Fla. Stat.  
 
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. 
 
 
31 
 
 
Community Center. §893.13(1)(c) Fla. Stat.  
 
The term “community center” means a facility operated by a nonprofit 
community-based organization for the provision of recreational, social, or 
educational services to the public. 
 
 
Assisted living facility. § 429.02(5) Fla. Stat.  
 
“Assisted living facility” means any building or buildings, section or 
distinct part of a building, private home, boarding home, home for the aged, 
or other residential facility, whether operated for profit or not, which 
undertakes through its ownership or management to provide housing, meals, 
and one or more personal services for a period exceeding 24 hours to one or 
more adults who are not relatives of the owner or administrator. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable.§ 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to (crime 
charged).  (Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense. However, y  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) [he] [she] knew 
of the presence of the controlled substance and exercised control or ownership 
over the substance.was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of (crime charged). 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of (crime charged). 
 
 
32 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
DRUG ABUSE — CONTRABAND SELL, MANUFACTURE, DELIVER, 
OR POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO SELL, MANUFACTURE OR 
DELIVER A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IN SPECIFIED 
LOCATIONS 
— 893.13(1)(c) – (f) and (h) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Drug abuse possession 
Sale, Manufacture, or 
Delivery of a 
controlled substance, if 
Sale, Manufacture, or 
Delivery is charged  
 
893.13(6)(a) 
893.13(1)(a) 
25.7 
25.2 
Possession of a 
Controlled Substance, 
if Possession with 
Intent to Sell, 
Manufacture, or 
Deliver is charged 
None 
893.13(6) 
25.7 
 
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.  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], 2000 [765 So. 2d 692], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], 
and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.7 DRUG ABUSE  POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE 
§ 893.13(6)(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) Possession of a Controlled 
Substance, the State must prove the following [three] [four] elements beyond a 
reasonable doubt: 
 
 
33 
 
1. 
(Defendant) possessed a certain substance knew of the presence of 
a substance. 
 
2. 
The substance was (specific substance alleged). (Defendant) 
exercised control or ownership over that substance. 
 
3. 
(Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the substance. The 
substance was (specific substance alleged). 
 
§ 893.13(6)(b) Fla. Stat. 
The jury must make a finding as to weight if the defendant is charged with 
possessing more than 20 grams of cannabis or more than 3 grams of a 
substance listed in § 893.03(1)(c)46-50, 114-142, 151-159, or 166-169 Fla. 
Stat.  
4.        The [cannabis weighed more than 20 grams] [(insert name of 
substance listed in 893.03(1)(c)46-50 , 114-142, 151-159, or 166-169) 
weighed more than three grams].  
 
§ 893.13(6)(c) Fla. Stat. 
 
The jury must make a finding as to weight if the defendant is charged with 
violating § 893.13(6)(c) Fla. Stat. 
4.        The [(insert name of substance listed in 893.03(1)(a) or 893.03(1)(b)] 
[combination of (insert names of substances listed in 893.03(1)(a) or 
893.03(1)(b)] [mixture containing (insert name of substance listed in 
893.03(1)(a) or 893.03(1)(b)] weighed more than 10 grams.          
 
Definitions. 
Give if applicable. Cannabis. § § 893.02(3), 893.13(6)(b) Fla. Stat. 
Cannabis means all parts of any plant of the genus Cannabis, whether 
growing or not, and the seeds thereof [but does not include any resin extracted 
from the plant].  
 
 
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. There are two ways to exercise control: actual 
possession and constructive possession. 
 
 
34 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and:  
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance, the controlled substance is in a place over which the person 
(defendant) has control, and the person has the ability to control the substance.  
or in which the (defendant) has concealed it.  
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself.   
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of a substance and may jointly possess 
an article exercising exercise control over it.  In that case, each of those 
persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance.  
 
35 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
 
Give if applicable. Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).  
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
substance and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over 
the place where the substance was located, and the substance was located in a 
common area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance. Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable. § F.S. 893.101(2) 
and (3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to the 
 
36 
 
crime of Possession of a Controlled Substance. (Defendant) has raised this 
affirmative defense.  However, y 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) [he] [she] knew 
of the presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance.  
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Possession of a Controlled Substance. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of Possession of a Controlled Substance. 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. 
 
POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE – 893.13(6) 
CATEGORY ONE CATEGORY TWO FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Possession of Less 
than 20 Grams of  
Cannabis or 
Possession of Less 
than 3 Grams of a 
Substance listed in 
893.03(1)(c)46-50, 
114-142, 151-159, 
or 166-169, if the 
felony level of these 
substances is 
charged 
 
893.13(6)(b) 
25.7 
 
Attempt 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
 
37 
 
Comment 
 
 
Note § 893.13(6)(b), Fla. Stat., if the charge involves possession or delivery 
without consideration of not more than 20 grams of cannabis. 
 
 
Fla. Stat. §893.21 
 
A person acting in good faith who seeks medical assistance for an 
individual experiencing a drug-related overdose may not be prosecuted for 
Possession of a Controlled Substance if the evidence of the possession was 
obtained as a result of the person’s seeking medical assistance.  
 
 
A special instruction is necessary when the defense is a mere involuntary or 
superficial possession. See cases such as Hamilton v. State, 732 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 2d 
DCA 1999) and Sanders v. State, 563 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).  
  
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also 
SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.8 DRUG ABUSE – OBTAINING A CONTROLLED 
SUBSTANCE BY FRAUD, ETC. 
§ 893.13(7)(a)9, 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] [Fraud] [Forgery] [Deception] [Subterfuge], the State 
must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
[Misrepresentation] 
[Fraud] 
[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. 
 
 
38 
 
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]. 
 
 
 
 
[misrepresentation]. 
 
 
 
[fraud]. 
 
 
 
[forgery]. 
 
 
 
[deception]. 
 
 
 
[subterfuge]. 
 
Affirmative defense: Lack of kKnowledge of the illicit nature of the 
controlled substance.  Give if applicable.  § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense to the 
crime of Obtaining a Controlled Substance by [Misrepresentation] [Fraud] 
[Forgery] [Deception] [Subterfuge].  (Defendant) has raised this affirmative 
defense.  However, you are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) was 
in actual or constructive possession of the controlled substance. 
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) was in actual or 
constructive possession of the controlled substance. Read explanation of actual 
and/or constructive possession, as applicable. 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Obtaining a Controlled Substance by [Misrepresentation] 
[Fraud] [Forgery] [Deception] [Subterfuge]. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of Obtaining a Controlled Substance by 
[Misrepresentation] [Fraud] [Forgery] [Deception] [Subterfuge]. 
 
 
39 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. 
 
Comment 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 
(Fla. 2004)]. 
 
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 three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. (Defendant) knowingly [possessed] [sold] [purchased] 
[manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] a certain 
substance. 
 
           [sold] 
 
[purchased] 
 
[manufactured] 
 
[delivered] 
 
[brought into Florida] 
 
[possessed] 
 
 
 
a certain substance. 
 
2. The substance was cannabis. 
 
3. The cannabis [weighed more than 25 pounds] [constituted 300 or 
more cannabis plants]. 
 
 
If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla. 
Stat., instructions on the following elements 1 and 2 should be given instead of 
elements 1 and 2 above.  For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to 
 
40 
 
sell heroin but actually sold cannabis, instructions on elements 1 and 2 below 
would be given. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] 
[bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in 
§ 893.135(1), Fla. Stat.),. 
 
2. The defendant actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] 
[delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] cannabis.   
 
Definitions. Give as applicable. 
 
Cannabis. § 893.02(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
“Cannabis” means all parts of any plant of the genus Cannabis whether 
growing or not. 
 
 
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(13)(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. 
 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
41 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and : 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
 
42 
 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
A special instruction is necessary where the premises is jointly occupied and 
the contraband is located in a common area, in plain view, and in the presence of 
the owner or occupant. Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 
(Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. However, you may 
infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the substance and had the ability 
to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the place where the substance 
was located, and the substance was located in a common area in plain view 
and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
43 
 
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance. Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable. § 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an 
affirmative defense to Trafficking in Cannabis.  The defendant (Defendant) 
has raised this defense. You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was 
aware of the illicit nature of the controlled substance if you find that 
(defendant) was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance.  
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that (defendant) knew 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the 
charge have been proved, you should find [him] [her] guilty of Trafficking in 
Cannabis. 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her]not guilty of Trafficking in Cannabis. 
 
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
 
See State v. Weller, 590 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1991). 
 
If you find the defendant guilty of Trafficking in Cannabis, you must 
further determine by your verdict whether the State has proved beyond a 
reasonable doubt that: 
 
 
Enhanced penalty.  See § 893.135(1)(a)1.-3., Fla. Stat. to verify the weights 
or amounts specified in the statute, as determined by the date of the offense.  Give 
if applicable up to extent of charge. 
a. [The cannabis weighed more than 25 pounds but less than 2,000 
pounds.] [constituted 300 or more cannabis plants but not more than 
2,000 cannabis plants.]] 
 
44 
 
 
 
b. [The cannabis [weighed 2,000 pounds or more but less than 10,000 
pounds.] [constituted 2,000 or more cannabis plants but not more 
than 10,000 cannabis plants.]] 
 
c. [The cannabis [weighed 10,000 pounds or more.] [constituted 10,000 
or more cannabis plants.] 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession of a certain amount of 
drugs. Each of these alternatives has its own statute for lower quantities of 
controlled substances. Accordingly, before deciding the appropriate lesser-included 
offenses, trial judges should review not only the evidence but also the charging 
document to see what type of trafficking was alleged. For example, if a defendant 
is charged only with Trafficking via Sale, then Possession of a Controlled 
Substance should not be given as a lesser-included offense.  
 
 
TRAFFICKING IN CANNABIS — 893.135(1)(a) 
CATEGORY 
ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. 
NO. 
Trafficking 
offenses requiring 
lower quantities of 
cannabis 
 
893.135(1)(a)1 
and 2 
25.9 
*Possession of 
Cannabis, if 
Trafficking via 
Possession is 
charged 
 
*893.13(6) 
25.7 
 
Attempt, except when delivery or 
conspiracy is charged  
777.04 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession. The lesser-included 
offenses depend on what is contained in the charging document and what is 
 
45 
 
supported by the evidence. For example, Possession of Cannabis is not a 
necessarily lesser-included offense of Trafficking in Cannabis via Sale.  However, 
Possession of Cannabis is a necessarily-lesser included offense if the defendant is 
charged with Trafficking via Possession. 
 
 
* Possession of More Than 20 Grams of Cannabis is a third-degree felony. 
Possession of Not More than 20 Grams of Cannabis is a first degree misdemeanor. 
See § 893.13(6) Fla. Stat.  
 
Delivery of Less than 20 Grams of Cannabis Without Consideration is a first 
degree misdemeanor. See § 893.13(3) Fla. Stat.  
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in §893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to another. 
There is no crime of attempted conspiracy. Hutchinson v. State, 315 So. 2d 546 
(Fla. 2d DCA 1975).  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1987 [509 So. 2d 917], 
1989 [543 So. 2d 1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2013 
[112 So. 3d 1211], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
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 three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) knowingly [possessed] [sold] [purchased] 
[manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] a certain 
substance. 
 
[sold] 
 
[purchased] 
 
[manufactured] 
 
[delivered] 
 
46 
 
 
[brought into Florida] 
 
[possessed] 
 
 
 
a certain substance. 
 
2. 
The substance was [cocaine] [a mixture containing cocaine]. 
 
3. 
The [cocaine] [mixture containing cocaine] weighed 28 grams or 
more. 
 
 
 If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla. 
Stat., instructions on the following elements 1 and 2 should be given instead of 
elements 1 and 2 above.  For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to 
sell heroin but actually sold cocaine, instructions on elements 1 and 2 below would 
be given. 
1. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] 
[bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in 
§ 893.135(1), Fla. Stat.),.  
 
2. The defendant 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(13)(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. 
 
 
47 
 
 
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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and: 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
 
48 
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
 
49 
 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
A special instruction is necessary where the premises is jointly occupied and 
the contraband is located in a common area, in plain view, and in the presence of 
the owner or occupant. Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 
(Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. However, you may 
infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the substance and had the ability 
to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the place where the substance 
was located, and the substance was located in a common area in plain view 
and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance. Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable.§ 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an 
affirmative defense to Trafficking in Cocaine.  The defendant (Defendant) has 
raised this defense. You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance if you find that (defendant) was 
in actual or constructive possession of the controlled substance.  
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Trafficking in Cocaine. 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her] not guilty of Trafficking in Cocaine. 
 
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
50 
 
 
 
See State v. Weller, 590 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1991). 
 
If you find the defendant guilty of Trafficking in Cocaine, you must 
further determine by your verdict whether the State has further proved 
beyond a reasonable doubt that: 
 
 
Enhanced penalty.  See § 893.135(1)(b)1.-2., Fla. Stat. to verify the weights 
or amounts specified in the statute, as determined by the date of the offense.  Give 
if applicable up to extent of charge. 
a. [The [cocaine][mixture containing cocaine] weighed 28 grams or 
more but less than 200 grams.] 
 
b. [The [cocaine][mixture containing cocaine] weighed 200 grams or 
more but less than 400 grams.] 
 
c. [The [cocaine][mixture containing cocaine] weighed 400 grams or 
more but less than 150 kilograms.] 
 
d. [The [cocaine][mixture containing cocaine] weighed 150 kilograms or 
more.]  
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession of a certain amount of 
drugs. Each of these alternatives has its own statute for lower quantities of 
controlled substances. Accordingly, before deciding the appropriate lesser-included 
offenses, trial judges should review not only the evidence but also the charging 
document to see what type of trafficking was alleged. For example, if a defendant 
is charged only with Trafficking via Sale, then Possession of a Controlled 
Substance should not be given as a lesser-included offense.  
 
 
51 
 
TRAFFICKING IN COCAINE — 893.135(1)(b)1 & 2 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Trafficking offenses 
requiring lower 
quantities of cocaine 
 
893.135(1)(b)1 25.10 
Possession of Cocaine, 
if Trafficking via 
Possession is charged 
 
893.13(6)(a) 
25.7 
 
Attempt except when 
delivery or conspiracy is 
charged 
777.04 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession. The lesser-included 
offenses depend on what is contained in the charging document and what is 
supported by the evidence. For example, Possession of Cocaine is not a necessarily 
lesser-included offense of Trafficking in Cocaine via Sale.  However, Possession 
of Cocaine is a necessarily-lesser included offense if the defendant is charged with 
Trafficking via Possession. 
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in §893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to another. 
There is no crime of attempted conspiracy. Hutchinson v. State, 315 So. 2d 546 
(Fla. 2d DCA 1975).  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1985 [477 So. 2d 985], 
1987 [509 So. 2d 917], 1989 [543 So. 2d 1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], 2007 
[SC05-1434, October 25, 2007 969 So. 2d 245], and 2013 [112 So. 3d 1211], and 
2014. See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.11 TRAFFICKING IN [MORPHINE] [OPIUM] [OXYCODONE] 
[HYDROCODONE] [HYDROMORPHONE] [HEROIN] [(SPECIFIC 
SUBSTANCE ALLEGED)] 
§ 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. 
 
52 
 
 
 
To prove the crime of Trafficking in [(specific substance alleged)], the 
State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) knowingly [possessed] [sold] [purchased] 
[manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] a certain 
substance. 
 
 
 
 
[sold] 
 
 
 
[purchased] 
 
 
 
[manufactured] 
 
 
 
[delivered] 
 
 
 
[brought into Florida] 
 
 
 
[possessed] 
 
 
 
a certain substance. 
 
2. 
The substance was [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] 
[hydrocodone] [hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance 
alleged)] [a mixture containing [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] 
[hydrocodone] [hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance 
alleged)]. 
 
3. 
The [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance alleged)] [mixture 
containing [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance alleged)] weighed 4 
grams or more. 
 
 
If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla. 
Stat., instructions on the following elements 1 and 2 should be given instead of 
elements 1 and 2 above.  For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to 
sell heroin but actually sold phencyclidine, instructions on elements 1 and 2 below 
would be given. 
 
 
1. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] 
[bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 
893.135(1), Fla. Stat.),. 
 
 
53 
 
2. The defendant 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(13)(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. 
 
 
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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and: 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
54 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
 
55 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
A special instruction is necessary where the premises is jointly occupied and 
the contraband is located in a common area, in plain view, and in the presence of 
the owner or occupant. Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 
(Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. However, you may 
infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the substance and had the ability 
to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the place where the substance 
was located, and the substance was located in a common area in plain view 
and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance. Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable. § 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an 
affirmative defense to Trafficking in (Substance Alleged). The defendant 
(Defendant) has raised this defense. You are permitted to presume that 
(defendant) was aware of the illicit nature of the controlled substance if you 
find that (defendant) was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance.  
 
 
56 
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercisedcontrol or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Trafficking in (Substance Alleged). 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her]not guilty of Trafficking in (Substance Alleged). 
 
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
 
See State v. Weller, 590 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1991). 
 
If you find the defendant guilty of Trafficking in Illegal Drugs, you must 
further determine by your verdict whether the State has proved beyond a 
reasonable doubt that: 
 
 
Enhanced penalty.  See § 893.135(1)(c)1.-2., Fla. Stat. to verify the weights 
or amounts specified in the statute, as determined by the date of the offense.  Give 
if applicable up to extent of charge. 
a. [The [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance alleged)] [mixture 
containing [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [herioin] [(specific substance alleged)] weighed 4 
grams or more but less than 14 grams.] 
 
b. [The [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance alleged)] [mixture 
containing [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [herioin] [(specific substance alleged)] weighed 14 
grams or more but less than 28 grams.] 
 
c. [The [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance alleged)] [mixture 
 
57 
 
containing [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [herioin] [(specific substance alleged)] weighed 28 
grams or more but less than 30 kilograms.] 
 
d. [The [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [heroin] [(specific substance alleged)] [mixture 
containing [morphine] [opium] [oxycodone] [hydrocodone] 
[hydromorphone] [herioin] [(specific substance alleged)] weighed 30 
kilograms or more.] 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession of a certain amount of 
drugs. Each of these alternatives has its own statute for lower quantities of 
controlled substances. Accordingly, before deciding the appropriate lesser-included 
offenses, trial judges should review not only the evidence but also the charging 
document to see what type of trafficking was alleged. For example, if a defendant 
is charged only with Trafficking via Sale, then Possession of a Controlled 
Substance should not be given as a lesser-included offense.  
 
TRAFFICKING IN ILLEGAL DRUGS — 893.135(1)(c)1 and 2 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. 
NO. 
Trafficking offenses 
requiring lower 
quantities of illegal 
drugs 
 
893.135(1)(c)1 25.11 
Possession of a 
Controlled Substance, 
if Trafficking via 
Possession is charged 
 
893.13(6)(a) 
25.7 
 
Attempt  except where 
delivery or conspiracy is 
charged 
777.04 
5.1 
 
 
58 
 
Comment 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession. The lesser-included 
offenses depend on what is contained in the charging document and what is 
supported by the evidence. For example, Possession of a Controlled Substance is 
not a necessarily lesser-included offense of Trafficking in a Controlled Substance 
via Sale. However, Possession of a Controlled Substance is a necessarily-lesser 
included offense if the defendant is charged with Trafficking via Possession. 
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in §893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to another. 
There is no crime of attempted conspiracy. Hutchinson v. State, 315 So. 2d 546 
(Fla. 2d DCA 1975).  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1985 [477 So. 2d 985], 
1987 [509 So. 2d 917], 1989 [543 So. 2d 1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], 2007 [969 
So. 2d 245], and 2013 [112 So. 3d 1211], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 
2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
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 three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) knowingly [possessed] [sold] [purchased] 
[manufactured] [delivered] [brought into Florida] a certain 
substance. 
 
 
[sold] 
 
[purchased] 
 
[manufactured] 
 
[delivered] 
 
59 
 
 
[brought into Florida] 
 
[possessed] 
 
 
 
a certain substance. 
 
2. 
The substance was [phencyclidine] [a mixture containing 
phencyclidine]. 
 
3. 
The [phencyclidine] [mixture containing phencyclidine] weighed 
28 grams or more. 
 
 
 
If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla. 
Stat., instructions on the following elements 1 and 2 should be given instead of 
elements 1 and 2 above.  For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to 
sell heroin but actually sold phencyclidine, instructions on elements 1 and 2 below 
would be given. 
1. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] 
[bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 
893.135(1), Fla. Stat.),.  
 
2. The defendant 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(13)(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. 
 
 
60 
 
 
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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and : 
 
a. 
The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
 
61 
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
 
62 
 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
A special instruction is necessary where the premises is jointly occupied and 
the contraband is located in a common area, in plain view, and in the presence of 
the owner or occupant. Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 
(Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. However, you may 
infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the substance and had the ability 
to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the place where the substance 
was located, and the substance was located in a common area in plain view 
and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable. § 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an 
affirmative defense to Trafficking in Phencyclidine.  The defendant 
(Defendant) has raised this defense. You are permitted to presume that 
(defendant) was aware of the illicit nature of the controlled substance if you 
find that (defendant) was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance.  
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Trafficking in Phencyclidine. 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her]not guilty of Trafficking in Phencyclidine. 
 
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
63 
 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
 
See State v. Weller, 590 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1991). 
 
If you find the defendant guilty of Trafficking in Phencyclidine, you 
must further determine by your verdict whether the State has proved beyond 
a reasonable doubt that: 
 
 
Enhanced penalty.  See § 893.135(1)(d)1.a.-c., Fla. Stat. to verify the 
weights or amounts specified in the statute, as determined by the date of the 
offense.  Give if applicable up to extent of charge. 
a. [The [phencyclidine][mixture containing phencyclidine] weighed 28 
grams or more but less than 200 grams.] 
 
b. [The [phencyclidine][mixture containing phencyclidine] weighed 200 
grams or more but less than 400 grams.] 
 
c. [The [phencyclidine][mixture containing phencyclidine] weighed 400 
grams or more.]  
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession of a certain amount of 
drugs. Each of these alternatives has its own statute for lower quantities of 
controlled substances. Accordingly, before deciding the appropriate lesser-included 
offenses, trial judges should review not only the evidence but also the charging 
document to see what type of trafficking was alleged. For example, if a defendant 
is charged only with Trafficking via Sale, then Possession of a Controlled 
Substance should not be given as a lesser-included offense.  
 
 
64 
 
TRAFFICKING IN PHENCYCLIDINE — 893.135(1)(d) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Trafficking offenses 
requiring lower 
quantities of 
phencyclidine 
 
893.135(1)(d)1.a 
and b 
25.9 
Possession of a 
Phencyclidine, if 
Trafficking via 
Possession is charged 
 
893.13(6)(a) 
25.7 
 
Attempt  except when 
delivery or conspiracy 
is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession. The lesser-included 
offenses depend on what is contained in the charging document and what is 
supported by the evidence. For example, Possession of Phencyclidine is not a 
necessarily lesser-included offense of Trafficking in Phencyclidine via Sale.  
However, Possession of Phencyclidine is a necessarily-lesser included offense if 
the defendant is charged with Trafficking via Possession. 
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in §893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to another. 
There is no crime of attempted conspiracy. Hutchinson v. State, 315 So. 2d 546 
(Fla. 2d DCA 1975).  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1987 [509 So. 2d 917], 
1989 [543 So. 2d 1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], 2013 [112 
So. 3d 1211], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
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. 
 
 
 
65 
 
 
To prove the crime of Trafficking in Methaqualone, the State must 
prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) knowingly [possessed] [sold] [purchased] 
[manufactured] [delivered ] [brought into Florida] a certain 
substance. 
 
 
[sold] 
 
[purchased] 
 
[manufactured] 
 
[delivered] 
 
[brought into Florida] 
 
[possessed] 
 
 
 
a certain substance. 
 
2. 
The substance was [methaqualone] [a mixture containing 
methaqualone]. 
 
3. 
The [methaqualone] [a mixture containing methaqualone] 
weighed 200 grams or more.  
 
 
 
If applicable under the facts of the case and pursuant to § 893.135(2), Fla. 
Stat., instructions on the following elements 1 and 2 should be given instead of 
elements 1 and 2 above.  For example, if it is alleged that the defendant intended to 
sell heroin but actually sold methaqualone, instructions on elements 1 and 2 below 
would be given. 
 
 
1. (Defendant) intended to [sell] [purchase] [manufacture] [deliver] 
[bring into Florida] [possess] (an enumerated controlled substance in § 
893.135(1), Fla. Stat.),.  
 
2. The defendant actually [sold] [purchased] [manufactured] 
[delivered] [brought into Florida] [possessed] methaqualone or a 
mixture containing methaqualone. 
 
 
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. 
 
66 
 
 
 
Manufacture.  § 893.02(13)(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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
substance and : 
 
a. The controlled substance is in the hand of or on the person, or 
 
b. The controlled substance is in a container in the hand of or on 
the person, or 
c. The controlled substance is so close as to be within ready reach 
and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a controlled substance is not sufficient to establish 
control over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the 
person has control. 
 
 
67 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the substance,  the controlled substance is in a place over which the 
(defendant) person has control, and the person has the ability to control the 
substance or in which the (defendant) has concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a substance is not sufficient to establish control over 
that substance when the substance is in a place that the person does not 
control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance that was is in a place over which the 
(defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must prove the  
(defendant’s) (1) knew that the substance was within [his] [her] presence has 
the control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that the 
controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence exercised control or 
ownership over the substance itself. 
 
           Joint possession. 
Possession of a substance may be sole or joint, that is, two or more 
persons may be aware of the presence of the substance and may jointly 
possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, each of 
those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the substance. 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the substance, [or] 
 
 
68 
 
b. was within ready reach of the substance and the substance was under 
[his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the substance was located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where a 
substance was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the substance or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence.  
 
A special instruction is necessary where the premises is jointly occupied and 
the contraband is located in a common area, in plain view, and in the presence of 
the owner or occupant. Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 
(Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a controlled substance, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. However, you may 
infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the substance and had the ability 
to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the place where the substance 
was located, and the substance was located in a common area in plain view 
and in the presence of the defendant.  
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Affirmative 
defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. Give if applicable. § 893.101(2) and 
(3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an 
affirmative defense to Trafficking in Methaqualone.  The defendant 
(Defendant) has raised this defense. You are permitted to presume that 
(defendant) was aware of the illicit nature of the controlled substance if you 
find that (defendant) was in actual or constructive possession of the controlled 
substance.  
 
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
69 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that 
(defendant) knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the 
elements of the charge have been proved, you should find (defendant) [him] 
[her] guilty of Trafficking in Methaqualone. 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) [him] [her]not guilty of Trafficking in Methaqualone. 
 
Give if applicable. See McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002). 
 
You are permitted to infer that a person who sells a controlled 
substance knows of its illicit nature. 
 
 
See State v. Weller, 590 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1991). 
 
If you find the defendant guilty of Trafficking in Methaqualone, you 
must further determine by your verdict whether the State has proved beyond 
a reasonable doubt that: 
 
 
Enhanced penalty.  See § 893.135(1)(e)1.a.-c., Fla. Stat. to verify the 
weights or amounts specified in the statute, as determined by the date of the 
offense.  Give if applicable up to extent of charge. 
a. [The [methaqualone][mixture containing methaqualone] weighed 
200 grams or more but less than 5 kilograms.] 
 
b. [The [methaqualone][mixture containing methaqualone] weighed 5 
kilograms or more but less than 25 kilograms.] 
 
c. [The [methaqualone][mixture containing methaqualone] weighed 25 
kilograms or more.] 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession of a certain amount of 
drugs. Each of these alternatives has its own statute for lower quantities of 
controlled substances. Accordingly, before deciding the appropriate lesser-included 
offenses, trial judges should review not only the evidence but also the charging 
document to see what type of trafficking was alleged. For example, if a defendant 
is charged only with Trafficking via Sale, then Possession of a Controlled 
Substance should not be given as a lesser-included offense.  
 
70 
 
 
TRAFFICKING IN METHAQUALONE — 893.135(1)(e)1 
CATEGORY 
ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Trafficking 
offenses requiring 
lower quantities of 
methaqualone 
 
893.135(1)(e)1.a 
and b 
25.13 
Possession of 
Methaqualone, if 
Trafficking via 
Possession is 
charged 
 
893.13(6)(a) 
25.7 
 
Attempt  except when delivery 
or conspiracy is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
 
Trafficking can be committed by sale, purchase, manufacture, delivery, 
bringing into this state, or actual or constructive possession. The lesser-included 
offenses depend on what is contained in the charging document and what is 
supported by the evidence. For example, Possession of Methaqualone is not a 
necessarily lesser-included offense of Trafficking in Methaqualone via Sale.  
However, Possession of Methaqualone is a necessarily-lesser included offense if 
the defendant is charged with Trafficking via Possession. 
 
 
There is no crime of Attempted Delivery because the definition of “delivery” 
in §893.03(6) Fla. Stat. includes the attempt to transfer from one person to another. 
There is no crime of attempted conspiracy. Hutchinson v. State, 315 So. 2d 546 
(Fla. 2d DCA 1975).  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1987 [509 So. 2d 917], 
1989 [543 So. 2d 1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], 2013 [112 
So. 3d 1211], and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
 
71 
 
25.14 DRUG ABUSE – USE OR POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO USE OF 
DRUG PARAPHERNALIA 
§ 893.147(1), Fla. Stat. 
 
To prove the crime of Use or Possession With Intent to Use 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 knew of the presence of the drug 
paraphernalia. 
 
2. 
(Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the drug 
           paraphernalia [used the drug paraphernalia] [or] [possessed the 
drug paraphernalia with intent to use it] to: 
 
 
[plant] [propagate] [cultivate] [grow] [harvest] [manufacture] 
[compound] [convert] [produce] [process] [prepare] [test] 
[analyze] [pack] repack] [store] contain] [conceal] a controlled 
substance; 
 
          or    
 
          [inject] [ingest] [inhale] [or] [introduce] a controlled substance 
into the human body.  
 
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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession of drug paraphernalia means the person is aware of 
the presence of the drug paraphernalia and: 
 
a. 
The drug paraphernalia is in the hand of or on the person, 
 
72 
 
           or 
b. 
The drug paraphernalia is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The drug paraphernalia is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to a paraphernalia is not sufficient to establish control 
over that paraphernalia when it is not in a place over which the person has 
control. 
 
Constructive possession.  
Constructive possession of drug paraphernalia means the person is 
aware of the presence of the drug paraphernalia, the drug paraphernalia is in 
a place over which the (defendant) person has control, and the person has the 
ability to control the drug paraphernalia. or in which the (defendant) has 
concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to drug paraphernalia is not sufficient to establish 
control over that drug paraphernalia when the drug paraphernalia is in a 
place that the person does not control.  
 
Give if applicable. 
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance is drug paraphernalia that was in a place 
over which the (defendant) does [he] [she] did not have control, the State must 
prove the (defendant’s) (1) knew that the drug paraphernalia was within [his] 
[her] presence control over the controlled substance and (2) knowledge that 
the controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence. exercised 
control or ownership over the drug paraphernalia itself.  
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of drug paraphernalia may be sole or joint, that is, two or 
more persons may be aware of the presence of the drug paraphernalia and 
may jointly possess an article, exercising exercise control over it.  In that case, 
each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article. the drug 
paraphernalia. 
 
 
73 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of paraphernalia, knowledge of its 
presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of paraphernalia, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of the drug paraphernalia, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the drug paraphernalia and the drug 
paraphernalia was under [his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where the drug paraphernalia was 
located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the drug 
paraphernalia and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where  drug 
paraphernalia was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the drug paraphernalia or the ability to control it, in the absence 
of other incriminating evidence.  
 
 
Give if applicable. Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).  
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
drug paraphernalia and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint 
control over the place where the drug paraphernalia was located, and the 
drug paraphernalia was located in a common area in plain view and in the 
presence of the defendant.  
 
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, 
 
74 
 
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. 
 
75 
 
 
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. 
 
76 
 
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. 
 
 
77 
 
12. 
The existence and scope of legitimate uses for the object in the 
community. 
 
13. 
Expert testimony concerning its use. 
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Give if 
applicable.  § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense.  
(Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense.  However, you are permitted 
to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit nature of the controlled 
substance if you find that (defendant) was in actual or constructive possession 
of the controlled substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced that (defendant) knew of the 
illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the charge 
have been proved, you should find (defendant) guilty. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) not guilty. 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA — 893.147(1) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
None 
 
 
 
 
Attempt 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], 1992 [603 So. 2d 1175], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], 
and 2014.  See also SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
 
 
 
78 
 
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) three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) [delivered] [possessed with intent to deliver] 
[manufactured with intent to deliver] drug paraphernalia.  
 
 
[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 a controlled substance into 
the human body (specific substance alleged). 
 
Definitions.  
Possession.  Give if possession with intent to deliver 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. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
Actual possession. 
Actual possession of drug paraphernalia means the person is aware of 
the presence of the paraphernalia and: 
 
79 
 
 
a. 
The drug paraphernalia is in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
b. 
The drug paraphernalia is in a container in the hand of or 
on the person, or 
c. 
The drug paraphernalia is so close as to be within ready 
reach and is under the control of the person. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to a paraphernalia is not sufficient to establish control 
over that controlled substance when it is not in a place over which the person 
has control. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
 
Constructive possession of drug paraphernalia means the person is 
aware of the presence of the drug paraphernalia, the drug paraphernalia is in 
a place over which the (defendant) person has control, and the person has the 
ability to control the drug paraphernalia or in which the (defendant) has 
concealed it. 
 
Give if applicable. 
Mere proximity to drug paraphernalia is not sufficient to establish 
control over that drug paraphernalia when the drug paraphernalia is in a 
place that the person does not control.  
 
Give if applicable.  
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of a controlled 
substance if the controlled substance drug paraphernalia that was is in a place 
over which the (defendant) [he] [she] does did not have control, the State must 
prove the (defendant’s) (1) knew that the drug paraphernalia was within [his] 
[her] presence has the control over the controlled substance and (2) 
knowledge that the controlled substance was within the (defendant’s) presence 
exercised control or ownership over the drug paraphernalia itself. 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of drug paraphernalia may be sole or joint, that is, two or 
more persons may be aware of the presence of the drug paraphernalia and 
may jointly possess an article, exercising exercise control over it. In that case, 
each of those persons is considered to be in possession of that article the drug 
paraphernalia. 
 
80 
 
 
 
If a person has exclusive possession of a paraphernalia, knowledge of its 
presence may be inferred or assumed. 
 
 
If a person does not have exclusive possession of a paraphernalia, 
knowledge of its presence may not be inferred or assumed. 
 
Inferences.  
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
  
a. had direct physical custody of drug paraphernalia, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of drug paraphernalia and the drug 
paraphernalia was under [his] [her] control, [or] 
  
c. had exclusive control of the place where drug paraphernalia was 
located, 
  
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the drug 
paraphernalia and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where the 
drug paraphernalia was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge 
of the presence of the drug paraphernalia or the ability to control it, in the 
absence of other incriminating evidence.  
 
Give if applicable. See Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). 
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
drug paraphernalia and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint 
control over the place where the drug paraphernalia was located, and the 
drug paraphernalia was located in a common area in plain view and in the 
presence of the defendant.  
 
Deliver.  Give if delivery is charged.  § 893.02(5), Fla.Stat. 
“Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted 
transfer from one person to another of paraphernalia, whether or not there is 
an agency relationship. 
 
 
81 
 
Manufacture.  Give if manufacture is charged.  § 893.02(13)(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: 
 
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. 
 
82 
 
 
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. 
 
83 
 
 
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. 
 
 
84 
 
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. 
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Give if 
applicable.  § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense.  
(Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense.  However, you are permitted 
to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit nature of the controlled 
substance if you find that (defendant) was in actual or constructive possession 
of the controlled substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced that (defendant) knew of the 
illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the charge 
have been proved, you should find (defendant) guilty. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) not guilty. 
 
 
85 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
DELIVERY, POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DELIVER, OR 
MANUFACTURE WITH INTENT TO DELIVER DRUG 
PARAPHERNALIA — 893.147(2) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
None Possession of 
Drug Paraphernalia, if 
Possession of Drug 
Paraphernalia with 
Intent is charged 
 
893.147(1) 
25.14 
 
Attempt, except when 
delivery is charged 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 
1205], 1997 [697 So. 2d 84], and 2007 [969 So. 2d 245], and 2014.  See also 
SC03-629 [869 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2004)]. 
 
25.16 DRUG ABUSE – DELIVERY OF DRUG 
PARAPHERNALIA TO A MINOR 
§ 893.147(3)(a), Fla. Stat. 
 
To prove the crime of Delivery of Drug Paraphernalia to a Minor, the 
State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) delivered drug paraphernalia to (person alleged). 
 
2. 
(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 a controlled substance into 
the human body (specific substance alleged). 
 
3. 
When the delivery was made, (defendant) was 18 years old or over 
and (person alleged) was under 18 years old. 
 
86 
 
 
Definitions.  
Deliver. § 893.02)(5), Fla. Stat. 
“Deliver” or “delivery” means the actual, constructive, or attempted 
transfer from one person to another of paraphernalia, whether or not there is 
an agency relationship. 
 
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. 
 
 
87 
 
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. 
 
88 
 
 
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 
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. 
 
 
89 
 
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. 
 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  Give if 
applicable.  § 893.101(2) and (3), Fla. Stat. 
 
Knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an 
element of the offense of (insert name of offense charged).  Lack of knowledge 
of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is an affirmative defense.  
(Defendant) has raised this affirmative defense.  However, you are permitted 
to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit nature of the controlled 
substance if you find that (defendant) was in actual or constructive possession 
of the controlled substance. 
 
 
If from the evidence you are convinced that (defendant) knew of the 
illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the charge 
have been proved, you should find (defendant) guilty. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find 
(defendant) not guilty. 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. 
 
90 
 
 
Comment 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and amended in 2007 [969 So. 2d 245] 
and 2014.   
 
 
25.17 CONTRABAND IN COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY 
§ 951.22, Fla._Stat. 
 
To prove the crime of (crime charged) Contraband in a County Detention 
Facility, the State must prove the following two three elements beyond a 
reasonable doubt: 
1. 
(Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of an item. 
[introduced contraband into] 
[knowingly possessed contraband in] 
[gave contraband to an inmate in] 
[received contraband from an inmate in] 
[took contraband from] 
[attempted to take or send contraband from] 
 
a county detention facility. 
2. 
(Defendant) did not do so through regular channels as duly 
authorized by the Sheriff or officer in charge of the facility. 
 
 
Give as applicable. 
a. introduced the item into a county detention facility. 
b. possessed the item upon the grounds of a county detention facility.  
c. gave the item to an inmate of a county detention facility. 
d. received the item from an inmate of a county detention         facility.  
e. took the item from a county detention facility. 
f. attempted to [take] [send] the item from a county detention  facility. 
                 3.     The item was: 
 
91 
 
                  Give as applicable. 
a. a written communication to give to or receive from an 
 
inmate.   
b. a recorded communication to give to or receive from an 
inmate.  
c. currency or coin to give to or receive from an inmate. 
d. an article of [food] [clothing] to give to or receive from an 
inmate.  
e. a tobacco product.  
f. a cigarette. 
g. a cigar. 
h. a beverage that causes or may cause an intoxicating effect. 
i. a narcotic, hypnotic, or excitative drug or drug of any kind 
or nature. 
j. a controlled substance. 
k. a firearm. 
l. any instrumentality customarily used or which is intended 
to be used as a dangerous weapon. 
m. any instrumentality of any nature that may be or is 
intended to be used as an aid in effecting or attempting to 
effect an escape from a county facility.   
   
The court now instructs you that for purposes of this offense, 
"contraband" means: 
 
Select definition depending upon item alleged. 
[any currency or coin] 
[any article of food or clothing] 
[any written or recorded communication] 
[any intoxicating beverage or beverage which causes or may 
cause an intoxicating effect] 
[any narcotic, hypnotic, or excitative drug] 
 
92 
 
[any drug of any kind, including nasal inhalators] 
[sleeping pill, barbiturate] 
[any controlled substance. [(Item alleged)] is a controlled 
substance] 
[any firearm] 
[any instrumentality that may be or is intended to be used as 
a dangerous weapon] 
[any instrumentality that may be or is intended to be used as 
an aid in attempting to escape]. 
 
Definitions. 
         Give in all cases. § 951.23(1)(a) Fla. Stat. 
 
"County detention facility" means a county jail, a county stockade, a 
county work camp, a county prison camp, a county residential probation 
center, and any other place except a municipal detention facility used by a 
county or county officer for the detention of persons charged with or convicted 
of either felony or misdemeanor used by a county or county officer to detain 
persons charged with or convicted of crimes, including the grounds thereof. 
           § 951.23(1)(b) Fla. Stat. 
“County residential probation center” means a county-operated facility 
housing offenders serving misdemeanor sentences or first-time felony 
sentences. 
  
§ 951.23(1)(d) Fla. Stat. 
“Municipal detention facility” means a city jail, a city stockade, a city 
prison camp, and any other place except a county detention facility used by a 
municipality or municipal officer for the detention of persons charged with or 
convicted of violation of municipal laws or ordinances. 
 
In event of municipal facility involved, see statute. 
 
Definition. Give as applicable. 
 
To "introduce" means to put inside or into. 
 
Give when the evidence involves an inmate who is not in the facility. 
        It is unlawful to [give] [receive] a contraband item [to] [from] an inmate 
of a county detention facility even if the inmate was outside the facility at the 
time the contraband item was [given] [received]. 
Give if clothing is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
“Clothing” means things worn to cover the body and limbs. 
 
93 
 
Give if currency is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
“Currency” means money or another commodity which is in circulation 
as a medium of exchange. 
Give if weapon is alleged. State v. Fleming, 606 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1992). 
A “weapon” is an instrument that is designed and constructed for use as 
a weapon, or, if the instrument is capable of being used as a weapon, the 
defendant used, threatened to use, or intended to use the instrument as a 
weapon. 
 
Give if tobacco product is alleged. § 210.25(11) Fla. Stat.   
“Tobacco products” means loose tobacco suitable for smoking; snuff; 
snuff flour; cavendish; plug and twist tobacco; fine cuts and other chewing 
tobaccos; shorts; refuse scraps; clippings, cuttings, and sweepings of tobacco, 
and other kinds and forms of tobacco prepared in such manner as to be 
suitable for chewing; but “tobacco products” does not include cigarettes or 
cigars. 
 
Give if cigarette is alleged. § 210.01(1) Fla. Stat. 
“Cigarette” means any roll for smoking, except one of which the 
tobacco is fully naturally fermented, without regard to the kind of tobacco or 
other substances used in the inner roll or the nature or composition of the 
material in which the roll is wrapped, which is made wholly or in part of 
tobacco irrespective of size or shape and whether such tobacco is flavored, 
adulterated or mixed with any other ingredient. 
 
Give if a drug or controlled substance is alleged. 
A “drug of any kind” includes [nasal inhalators] [sleeping pills] 
[barbiturates] [a controlled substance]. (Name of drug or controlled substance) 
is a [drug] [controlled substance]. 
             Give if firearm is alleged. § 790.001(6) Fla. Stat. 
“Firearm” means any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is 
designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of 
an explosive [;the frame or receiver of any such weapon] [any firearm muffler 
or firearm silencer] [any destructive device] [any machine gun]. 
 
94 
 
 
Give if possession is alleged. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
            Actual possession.  
 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
object and 
a. the object is in the hand of or on the person, or 
b. the object is in a container in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
c. the object is so close as to be within ready reach and is 
under the control of the person. 
 
Constructive possession. 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the object, the object is in a place over which the person has control, and the 
person has the ability to control the object.  
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to an object is not sufficient to establish control over 
that object when the object is in a place that the person does not control. 
          Give if applicable.    
 
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of an object 
that was in a place [he] [she] did not control, the State must prove (defendant) 
(1) knew that the object was within [his] [her] presence and (2) exercised 
control or ownership over the object itself. 
Joint possession. 
Possession of an object may be sole or joint, that is, two or more persons 
may be aware of the presence of an object and may jointly exercise control 
over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of 
that object.  
 Inferences.  
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
 
a. had direct physical custody of the object, [or] 
 
95 
 
b. was within ready reach of the object and the object was under [his] 
[her] control, [or] 
c. had exclusive control of the place where the object was located, 
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where an 
object was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the object or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence. 
 
Give if applicable. Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).  
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
object and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the 
place where the object was located, and the object was located in a common 
area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant. 
Affirmative defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. § 893.101(2) Fla. 
Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is a 
defense to possession of a controlled substance. Accordingly, the defendant is 
not guilty of possessing a controlled substance if [he] [she] did not know of the 
illicit nature of the substance.  
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised management, control, or ownership 
over the substance. 
 
If you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that (defendant) knew 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the 
charge have been proved, you should find [him] [her] guilty. 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find [him] 
[her] not guilty of possession of a controlled substance. 
 
 
Affirmative defense of permission. Give if the defendant has satisfied his or 
her burden of production. See Wright v. State, 442 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1983).  
 
96 
 
It is a defense to the crime of Contraband in a County Detention 
Facility if the defendant used regular channels and was authorized by the 
sheriff or officer in charge of the detention facility to [introduce][possess] 
[give][receive][take][attempt to take or send] the contraband item [into] 
[from] the facility. The defendant has raised this defense.  
If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant used regular 
channels and had authorization from the sheriff or officer in charge of the 
detention facility, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.  
If the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did 
not use regular channels or did not have authorization from the sheriff or 
officer in charge of the detention facility, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if 
all the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable 
doubt.   
 
See 25.2 for definition of "possession." 
Lesser Included Offenses 
CONTRABAND IN COUNTY DETENTION FACILITIES — 951.22 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
None Possession of a 
Controlled Substance 
if a controlled 
substance is the 
contraband alleged 
 
893.13(6) 
25.7 
 
Possession of less than 
20 grams of cannabis 
893.13(6)(b) 
 
 
Carrying a Concealed 
Firearm 
790.01(2) 
10.1 
 
Carrying a Concealed 
Weapon 
790.01(1) 
10.1 
 
Attempt 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
 
97 
 
Comment 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1987 and amended in 1989 [543 So. 2d 1205] 
and 2014. 
 
25.18 CONTRABAND IN JUVENILE [DETENTION FACILITY] 
[COMMITMENT PROGRAM]  
§ 985.4046 985.711, Fla._Stat. 
 
 
To prove the crime of [introducing] [removing] [possession] of 
contraband in a juvenile detention facility Contraband in Juvenile [Detention 
Facility][Commitment Program], the State must prove the following two three 
elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of an item. 
 
[introduced contraband into] 
[knowingly possessed contraband in] 
[gave contraband to a juvenile offender in] 
[took contraband from] 
[attempted to take or send contraband from] 
[sent contraband to] 
 
a [juvenile detention facility] [juvenile commitment program]. 
 
2. 
(Defendant) did not do so as authorized by the [program policy] 
[operating procedure] [facility superintendent] [program 
director] [manager]. 
Give as applicable. 
a. possessed an item while upon the grounds of a juvenile [detention 
facility] [commitment program]. 
 
b. introduced the item into or upon the grounds of a juvenile 
[detention facility] [commitment program]. 
 
c. [took] [attempted to take] [sent] [attempted to send] an item from 
a juvenile [detention facility] [commitment program]. 
 
 
98 
 
d. [transmitted] [attempted to transmit] an item to a juvenile 
offender into or upon the grounds of a juvenile [detention facility] 
[commitment program].   
   
e. [caused][attempted to cause] an item to be [transmitted to]            
[received by] a juvenile offender upon the grounds of a juvenile 
[detention facility] [commitment program].     
    
3. 
The item was: 
 
Give as applicable. 
a. an unauthorized article of [food] [clothing]. 
 
b. a beverage that causes or may cause an intoxicating effect. 
 
c. a controlled substance. (Name of controlled substance alleged) is a  
controlled substance.  
 
d. a prescription or nonprescription drug that has a hypnotic, 
stimulating, or depressing effect.  
 
e. a firearm. 
 
f. a weapon of any kind. 
 
g. an explosive substance. 
 
 
Definitions. Give as applicable. 
          § 985.03(19), Fla._Stat. 
         A "juvenile detention facility" is a facility used pending court 
adjudication or disposition or execution of a court order for the temporary 
care of a child alleged or found to have committed a violation of law. 
 
         A "juvenile commitment program" is a facility used for the commitment 
of adjudicated delinquents. 
 
 
"Introduce" means to put inside or into. 
 
Give if clothing is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
 
99 
 
“Clothing” means things worn to cover the body and limbs. 
 
Give if weapon is alleged. State v. Fleming, 606 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1992). 
A “weapon” is an instrument that is designed and constructed for use as 
a weapon, or, if the instrument is capable of being used as a weapon, the 
defendant used, threatened to use, or intended to use the instrument as a 
weapon. 
 
 
Give if firearm is alleged. § 790.001(6) Fla. Stat. 
“Firearm” means any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is 
designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of 
an explosive [;the frame or receiver of any such weapon] [any firearm muffler 
or firearm silencer] [any destructive device] [any machine gun]. 
 
 
Give if possession is alleged. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
 
 
            Actual possession.  
 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
object and 
a. the object is in the hand of or on the person, or 
b. the object is in a container in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
c. the object is so close as to be within ready reach and is 
under the control of the person. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the object, the object is in a place over which the person has control, and the 
person has the ability to control the object.  
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to an object is not sufficient to establish control over 
that object when the object is in a place that the person does not control. 
 
 
100 
 
          Give if applicable.    
 
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of an object 
that was in a place [he] [she] did not control, the State must prove (defendant) 
(1) knew that the object was within [his] [her] presence and (2) exercised 
management, control, or ownership over the object itself . 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of an object may be sole or joint, that is, two or more persons 
may be aware of the presence of an object and may jointly exercise control 
over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of 
that object.  
 
 Inferences.  
          Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
 
a. had direct physical custody of the object, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the object and the object was under [his] 
[her] control, [or] 
 
c. had exclusive control of the place where the object was located, 
 
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where an 
object was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the object or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence. 
 
 
Give if applicable. Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).  
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
object and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the 
place where the object was located, and the object was located in a common 
area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant. 
 
Affirmative defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. § 893.101(2) Fla. 
Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
101 
 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is a 
defense to possession of a controlled substance. Accordingly, the defendant is 
not guilty of possessing a controlled substance if [he] [she] did not know of the 
illicit nature of the substance.  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that (defendant) knew 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the 
charge have been proved, you should find [him] [her] guilty. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find [him] 
[her] not guilty of possession of a controlled substance. 
 
 
Affirmative defense of permission. Give if the defendant has satisfied his or 
her burden of production. See Wright v. State, 442 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1983).  
It is a defense to the crime of Contraband in Juvenile [Detention 
Facility] [Commitment Program] if the defendant was authorized through 
program policy or operating procedure or had the permission of the facility 
superintendent, program director, or manager of the [detention facility] 
[commitment program] to [possess] [introduce] [take] [attempt to take] [send] 
[attempt to send] [transmit] [attempt to transmit] [cause to transmit] [attempt 
to cause to transmit] the contraband item [into] [from] the facility. The 
defendant has raised this defense.  
 
If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant was 
authorized through program policy or operating procedure or had the 
permission of the facility superintendent, program director, or manager of the 
[detention facility] [commitment program], you should find [him] [her] not 
guilty of Contraband in a Juvenile [Detention Facility] [Commitment 
Program].  
 
If the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did 
not have authorization through program policy or operating procedure or did 
not have the permission of the facility superintendent, program director, or 
 
102 
 
manager of the [detention facility] [commitment program], you should find 
[him] [her] guilty, if all the elements of the charge have also been proven 
beyond a reasonable doubt.   
 
 
"Introduce" means to put inside or into. 
 
 
Possession 
 
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, (2) knowledge that the thing was within the person's 
presence, and (3) knowledge of the illicit nature of the thing. 
 
 
For purposes of this offense, "contraband" means: 
 
[any unauthorized article of food or clothing] 
 
[any intoxicating beverage or any beverage that causes or 
may cause an intoxicating effect] 
 
[any controlled substance. (Substance alleged) is a controlled 
substance.] See § 893.02(4), Fla.Stat. 
 
 
103 
 
[any prescription or nonprescription drug that has a 
hypnotic, stimulating, or depressing effect] 
 
[any firearm or weapon of any kind or any explosive 
substance]. 
 
 
Give as applicable. 
 
A "juvenile detention facility" is a facility used pending court 
adjudication or disposition or execution of a court order for the temporary care 
of a child alleged or found to have committed a violation of law. 
 
 
A "juvenile commitment program" is a facility used for the commitment 
of adjudicated delinquents. 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
CONTRABAND IN JUVENILE FACILITY — 985.4046 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
None 
 
 
 
 
Attempt (although 
some attempts are 
included as elements) 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
Comment 
 
 
This instruction is based on the text of § 985.4046, Fla.Stat. (1997). 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 March 2000 and amended in 2014. 
 
25.20 POSSESSION OF CONTRABAND [IN] [UPON THE] GROUNDS OF 
A STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 
§ 944.47(1)(c) Fla. Stat. 
 
To prove the crime of Possession of Contraband [In] [Upon the 
Grounds of] a State Correctional Facility, the State must prove the following 
two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. (Defendant) possessed 
 
104 
 
 
Give as applicable. 
a. [written or recorded communication] [currency or coin] [an 
article of [food][clothing]] that was [given or transmitted] 
[intended to be given or transmitted] to an inmate of a state 
correctional institution. 
 
b. [an intoxicating beverage] [a beverage which causes or may cause 
an intoxicating effect.] 
 
c. a controlled substance. (Name of controlled substance) is a 
controlled substance. 
 
d. any prescription or non-prescription drug having a hypnotic, 
stimulating, or depressing effect. 
 
e. [a firearm] [a weapon of any kind] [an explosive substance]. 
 
f. any [cellular telephone] [portable communication device] 
intentionally and unlawfully introduced inside the secure 
perimeter of the state correctional institution. 
 
2. At the time, (defendant) was [an inmate] [upon the grounds] of a state 
correctional facility. 
 
 
Give in all cases. § 944.02(8) Fla. Stat.   
“State correctional facility” means any prison, road camp, prison 
industry, prison forestry camp, or any prison camp or prison farm or other 
correctional facility, temporary or permanent, in which prisoners are housed, 
worked, or maintained, under the custody and jurisdiction of the Department 
of Corrections. 
 
 
Give if clothing is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
“Clothing” means things worn to cover the body and limbs. 
 
Give if currency is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
 
105 
 
“Currency” means money or another commodity which is in circulation 
as a medium of exchange. 
 
Give if weapon is alleged. State v. Fleming, 606 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1992). 
A “weapon” is an instrument that is designed and constructed for use as 
a weapon, or, if the instrument is capable of being used as a weapon, the 
defendant used, threatened to use, or intended to use the instrument as a 
weapon. 
 
       Give if firearm is alleged. § 790.001(6) Fla. Stat. 
“Firearm” means any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is 
designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of 
an explosive [;the frame or receiver of any such weapon] [any firearm muffler 
or firearm silencer] [any destructive device] [any machine gun]. 
 
Give if portable communication device is alleged. § 944.47(1)(a)6 Fla. Stat. 
The term “portable communication device” means any device carried, 
worn, or stored which is designed or intended to receive or transmit verbal or 
written messages, access or store data, or connect electronically to the Internet 
or any other electronic device and which allows communications in any form. 
Such devices include, but are not limited to, portable two-way pagers, hand-
held radios, cellular telephones, Blackberry-type devices, personal digital 
assistants or PDA’s, laptop computers, or any components of these devices 
which are intended to be used to assemble such devices. The term also 
includes any new technology that is developed for similar purposes. [Excluded 
from this definition is any device having communication capabilities which 
has been approved or issued by the department for investigative or 
institutional security purposes or for conducting other state business.] 
 
Possession. 
 
There are two ways to exercise control: actual possession and 
constructive possession. 
 
       Actual possession.  
 
Actual possession means the person is aware of the presence of the 
object and 
a. the object is in the hand of or on the person, or 
b. the object is in a container in the hand of or on the person, 
or 
 
106 
 
c. the object is so close as to be within ready reach and is 
under the control of the person. 
 
 
Constructive possession. 
Constructive possession means the person is aware of the presence of 
the object, the object is in a place over which the person has control, and the 
person has the ability to control the object.  
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
Mere proximity to an object is not sufficient to establish control over 
that object when the object is in a place that the person does not control. 
 
 
        Give if applicable.    
 
In order to establish (defendant’s) constructive possession of an object 
that was in a place [he] [she] did not control, the State must prove (defendant) 
(1) knew that the object was within [his] [her] presence and (2) exercised 
control or ownership over the object itself . 
 
Joint possession. 
Possession of an object may be sole or joint, that is, two or more persons 
may be aware of the presence of an object and may jointly exercise control 
over it. In that case, each of those persons is considered to be in possession of 
that object.  
 
Inferences.  
      Exclusive control. Henderson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); 
Meme v. State, 72 So. 3d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).  
 
If you find that (defendant): 
 
a. had direct physical custody of the object, [or] 
 
b. was within ready reach of the object and the object was under [his] 
[her] control, [or] 
 
c. had exclusive control of the place where the object was located, 
 
you may infer that [he] [she] was aware of the presence of the substance 
and had the ability to control it.  
 
 
107 
 
 
If (defendant) did not have exclusive control over the place where an 
object was located, you may not infer [he] [[she] had knowledge of the 
presence of the object or the ability to control it, in the absence of other 
incriminating evidence. 
 
 
Give if applicable. Duncan v. State, 986 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).  
However, you may infer that (defendant) knew of the presence of the 
object and had the ability to control it if [he] [she] had joint control over the 
place where the object was located, and the object was located in a common 
area in plain view and in the presence of the defendant. 
 
 
 
Affirmative defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. § 893.101(2) Fla. 
Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is a 
defense to the crime of Possession of a Controlled Substance. Accordingly, the 
defendant is not guilty of possessing a controlled substance if [he] [she] did not 
know of the illicit nature of the substance.  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that (defendant) knew 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the 
charge have been proved, you should find [him] [her] guilty. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether (defendant) 
knew of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find [him] 
[her] not guilty of possession of a controlled substance. 
 
Affirmative defense: Authorization. Give if the defendant has satisfied his or 
her burden of production. See Wright v. State, 442 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1983).  
 
108 
 
It is a defense to the crime of Possession of Contraband [In] [Upon the 
Grounds of] a State Correctional Facility if the defendant was authorized by 
the officer in charge of the correctional institution to possess the item [in] 
[upon the grounds of] a state correctional institution. The defendant has 
raised this defense.  
 
If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant had 
authorization from the officer in charge of the correctional institution, you 
should find [him] [her] not guilty.  
 
If the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did 
not have authorization from the officer in charge of the correctional 
institution, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all the elements of the charge 
have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
POSSESSION OF CONTRABAND [IN] [UPON THE] GROUNDS OF 
A STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION – 944.47(1)(c) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Possession of a 
Controlled Substance, 
if a controlled 
substance is the 
contraband alleged 
 
893.13 
25.7 
 
Possession of a 
Firearm or a 
Concealed Weapon By 
a Convicted Felon, if a 
firearm or concealed 
weapon is the 
contraband alleged and 
the possessor is an 
inmate.  
790.23 
10.15 
 
Carrying a Concealed 
Firearm 
790.01(2) 
10.1 
 
Carrying a Concealed 
Weapon 
790.01(1) 
10.1 
 
Attempt 
777.04(1) 
5.1 
 
 
109 
 
Comment 
 
This instruction was adopted in 2014. 
 
25.21 [INTRODUCTION] [REMOVAL] OF CONTRABAND [INTO] 
[FROM] A STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 
§ 944.47(1)(a), Fla. Stat. 
 
To prove the crime of [Introduction] [Removal] of Contraband [into] 
[from] a State Correctional Institution, the State must prove the following  
[three] [four] elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 
 
1. (Defendant) [introduced into or upon the grounds of] [took] 
[attempted to [take] [send]] an item [into] [from] a state correctional 
institution. 
 
2. (Defendant) had knowledge of the presence of the item. 
 
3.   The item was: 
 
       Give as applicable. 
a.  a [written] [recorded] communication. 
 
b.  [currency] [or] [coin]. 
 
c.  an article of [food] [clothing]. 
 
d.  an intoxicating beverage or a beverage which causes or may 
     cause an intoxicating effect. 
 
e.  a controlled substance. (Name of controlled substance) is a 
controlled substance. 
 
f.  any prescription or nonprescription drug having a hypnotic, 
     stimulating, or depressing effect. 
 
g.  [a firearm] [a weapon of any kind] [an explosive substance]. 
 
 
110 
 
h.  any [cellular telephone] [or] [portable communication device] 
intentionally and unlawfully introduced inside the secure 
perimeter of a state correctional institution]. 
 
 
      Give element #4 if element #3a, 3b, or 3c is given. 
4. (Defendant) [gave or transmitted] [or] [intended to give or transmit] 
the [written communication] [recorded communication] [currency] 
[coin] [article of food] [article of clothing] to an inmate of the state 
correctional institution. 
 
 
Give in all cases. State Correctional Facility. § 944.02(8) Fla. Stat.   
“State correctional facility” means any prison, road camp, prison 
industry, prison forestry camp, or any prison camp or prison farm or other 
correctional facility, temporary or permanent, in which prisoners are housed, 
worked, or maintained, under the custody and jurisdiction of the Department 
of Corrections. 
 
           Give if firearm is alleged. § 790.001(6) Fla. Stat. 
“Firearm” means any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is 
designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of 
an explosive [;the frame or receiver of any such weapon] [any firearm muffler 
or firearm silencer] [any destructive device] [any machine gun]. 
 
Give if clothing is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
“Clothing” means things worn to cover the body and limbs. 
 
Give if currency is alleged. State v. Becton, 665 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 5th DCA 
1995). 
“Currency” means money or another commodity which is in circulation 
as a medium of exchange. 
 
Give if weapon is alleged. State v. Fleming, 606 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1992). 
A “weapon” is an instrument that is designed and constructed for use as 
a weapon, or, if the instrument is capable of being used as a weapon, the 
defendant used, threatened to use, or intended to use the instrument as a 
weapon. 
 
 
111 
 
Give if portable communication device is alleged. § 944.47(1)(a)(6) Fla. 
Stat.  
 “Portable communication device” means any device carried, worn, or 
stored which is designed or intended to receive or transmit verbal or written 
messages, access or store data, or connect electronically to the Internet or any 
other electronic device and which allows communications in any form. Such 
devices include, but are not limited to, portable two-way pagers, hand-held 
radios, cellular telephones, Blackberry-type devices, personal digital assistants 
or PDA’s, laptop computers, or any components of these devices which are 
intended to be used to assemble such devices. The term also includes any new 
technology that is developed for similar purposes. [Excluded from this 
definition is any device having communication capabilities which has been 
approved or issued by the department for investigative or institutional 
security purposes or for conducting other state business.]  
 
Affirmative defense: Lack of knowledge of illicit nature. § 893.101(2) Fla. 
Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
Lack of knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance is a 
defense to this charge. Accordingly, the defendant is not guilty of this charge if 
[he] [she] did not know of the illicit nature of the controlled substance.  
 
You are permitted to presume that (defendant) was aware of the illicit 
nature of the controlled substance if you find that [he] [she] knew of the 
presence of the substance and exercised control or ownership over the 
substance. 
 
 
If you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that (defendant) knew 
of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, and all of the elements of the 
charge have been proven, you should find [him] [her] guilty. 
 
 
If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether (defendant) knew of the 
illicit nature of the controlled substance, you should find [him] [her] not 
guilty. 
 
Affirmative defense: Authorization. Give if the defendant has satisfied his or 
her burden of production. See Wright v. State, 442 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 
1983).  
It is a defense to the crime of [Introduction] [Removal] of Contraband 
[into] [from] a State Correctional Institution if the defendant used regular 
channels and was authorized by the officer in charge of the correctional 
 
112 
 
institution to [introduce][take][send] the item [into] [from] the state 
correctional institution. The defendant has raised this defense.  
 
If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant used regular 
channels and had authorization from the officer in charge of the correctional 
institution, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.  
 
If the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did 
not use regular channels or did not have authorization from the officer in 
charge of the correctional institution, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all 
the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.    
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
[INTRODUCTION] [REMOVAL] OF CONTRABAND [INTO] 
[FROM] A STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION – 944.47(1)(a) 
CATEGORY ONE 
CATEGORY TWO 
FLA. STAT. 
INS. NO. 
Possession of a 
Controlled Substance, 
if a controlled 
substance is the 
contraband alleged 
 
893.13 
25.7 
 
Possession of a 
Firearm or a 
Concealed Weapon By 
a Convicted Felon, if a 
firearm or concealed 
weapon is the 
contraband alleged and 
and the possessor is an 
inmate.  
790.23 
10.15 
 
Carrying a Concealed 
Firearm 
790.01(2) 
10.1 
 
Carrying a Concealed 
Weapon 
790.01(1) 
10.1 
 
Comment 
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 2014.