Title: In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases Report No. 2009.01
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC09-622
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: January 7, 2010

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC09-622 
____________ 
 
 
IN RE:  STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES -  
REPORT NO. 2009-01. 
 
[January 7, 2010] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal 
Cases (Committee) has submitted proposed changes to the standard jury 
instructions, seeking authorization for publication and use.1
                                          
 
1.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. 
  The Committee 
proposes new instruction 3.3(g), Bifurcated Trial Instruction – Phase Two, as well 
as amendments to the following instructions: 3.6(f), Justifiable Use of Deadly 
Force; 3.6(g), Justifiable Use of Non-deadly Force; 3.6(h), Justifiable Use of Force 
by Law Enforcement Officer; and 11.14(e), Failure to Register as a Sexual 
Offender.  The Committee published the proposals for comment in The Florida Bar 
News prior to submission to the Court.  Upon review of the Committee’s proposals 
 
- 2 - 
and comments received, we authorize the instructions for publication and use as 
proposed.  
 
New jury instruction 3.3(g), Bifurcated Trial Instruction – Phase Two, is 
based upon the Court’s decision in State v. Harbaugh, 754 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 2000).  
In Harbaugh, a felony DUI case, we held that a bifurcated proceeding was 
necessary when the defendant is convicted of a substantive offense and prior 
convictions create a reclassification of the statutory penalty, thereby requiring a 
jury finding.   In such a bifurcated proceeding, the jury must make the finding that 
the defendant had previously been convicted of the qualifying offenses for 
reclassification of the current offense.  Id. at 694.  Instruction 3.3(g) is intended to 
ensure that a jury makes the findings required by Harbaugh. 
 
We amend instruction 3.6(f), Justifiable Use of Deadly Force, and 
instruction 3.6(g), Justifiable Use of Non-deadly Force, to conform with statutory 
changes brought about by the Legislature’s amendment to section 776.051, Florida 
Statutes (2008).  See Ch. 2008-67, § 1, Laws of Fla.  That legislation was in 
response to Tillman v. State, 934 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2006).  In Tillman, the Court 
held that the offense of using force to resist an arrest was limited to situations 
where the law enforcement officer was effecting an arrest, and not to other types of 
police-citizen encounters.  Id. at 1266.  The plain language of section 776.051 
dictated such limited results, particularly since sections 784.07 and 843.01, Florida 
 
- 3 - 
Statutes (2005), which defined the offenses of battery on a law enforcement officer 
and resisting an officer with violence, respectively, included the alternative 
language that the state must prove the officer was “engaged in the lawful 
performance of his or her duties” or “in the lawful execution of any legal duty.”  
Tillman, 934 So. 2d at 1266 (quoting §§ 784.07(2), 843.01).  Without such 
alternative language that appears in sections 784.07 and 843.01, section 776.051 
could not be extended to those situations where a law enforcement officer was not 
in the process of making an actual arrest.  In chapter 2008-67, section 1, the 
Legislature expanded section 776.051(1) to include as the nonjustifiable use of 
force resisting a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal 
duty where the officer was acting in good faith.  The amendments to instructions 
3.6(f) and 3.6(g) include that new language reflecting amended section 776.051(1).  
Instructions 3.6(f) and 3.6(g) are further amended to include citations to Novak v. 
State, 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), clarifying that the “no duty to retreat” 
rule applies to situations where the defendant was not engaged in unlawful conduct 
beyond that for which he asserts justification. 
 
In addition, instruction 3.6(f) is also amended to include the statutory 
exceptions in section 776.013(2), Florida Statutes (2008), which may preclude 
giving the instruction on justifiable use of deadly force. 
 
- 4 - 
 
Instruction 3.6(h), Justifiable Use of Force by Law Enforcement Officer, is 
amended to reflect that force by a law enforcement officer or person assisting him 
or her is prohibited both in the case of making an unlawful arrest and in the 
unlawful execution of a legal duty.  See § 776.051(2), Fla. Stat. (2009). 
 
Instruction 11.14(e), originally authorized in 2008, see In re Standard Jury 
Instructions in Criminal Cases – Report No. 2007-4, 983 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 2008), is 
based upon section 943.0435(7), Florida Statutes (2009).  Subsection (7) requires, 
in pertinent part, that 
[a] sexual offender who intends to establish residence in another state 
or jurisdiction other than the State of Florida shall report in person to 
the sheriff of the county of current residence within 48 hours before 
the date he or she intends to leave this state to establish residence in 
another state or jurisdiction.  The notification must include the 
address, municipality, county, and state of intended residence.   
 
The amendment to instruction 11.14(e) clarifies that an offender may commit the 
offense by either reporting to the sheriff but failing to provide an address, or by 
failing to report at all and leaving the jurisdiction of the State of Florida. 
Having considered the Committee’s report and comments, we hereby 
authorize the publication and use of the instructions as they appear in the attached 
appendix.2
                                          
 
 
2.  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 
  In authorizing the publication and use of these instructions, we express 
 
- 5 - 
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.  New language is indicated by 
underlining, and deleted language is struck through.  The instructions as set forth in 
the appendix shall be effective when this opinion becomes final. 
 
It is so ordered. 
QUINCE, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, LABARGA, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED. 
 
Original Proceeding – Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases 
 
Judge Lisa T. Munyon, Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury 
Instructions in Criminal Cases, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orlando, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
                                                                                                                                        
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. 
 
- 6 - 
APPENDIX 
3.3(g) BIFURCATED TRIAL INSTRUCTION – PHASE TWO  
 
Give in phase two of a bifurcated jury trial in which the State alleges the 
Defendant is guilty of a felony based upon a second or subsequent conviction.  
(e.g. Felony Battery; Felony DUI-BUI; Felony Driving with License Cancelled, 
Revoked, or Suspended; Felony Petit Theft; Felony Voyeurism; etc.)  
 
Note to Judge: Review relevant statutes to determine whether an 
adjudication of guilt is necessary to constitute a conviction. 
 
You have found (defendant) guilty of (insert name of charged offense).  
You must now determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether: 
 
Give a or b as applicable. 
 
a.  (Defendant) was previously convicted of (insert name of charged 
 
offense ) prior to ( insert date of charged offense in this case).   
 
 
b.  (Defendant) was previously convicted of (insert name of charged 
 
offense ) (insert number of prior convictions alleged in indictment or 
 
information) times. 
  
Comment  
 
 
The State must prove the prior conviction(s), unless waived, or stipulated to, 
by the defense, beyond a reasonable doubt in phase two of the bifurcated trial.  The 
State and the court should accept the defendant’s stipulation to the prior 
conviction(s).  State v. Harbaugh, 754 So. 2d 691, 694 (Fla. 2000).  
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 2010.  
 
 
- 7 - 
3.6(f)  JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE 
 
 
Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those 
parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. 
 
 
Read in all cases. 
 
An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense.  It is 
a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] 
[injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force. 
 
 
Definition. 
 
“Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. 
 
 
Give if applicable.  § 782.02, Fla. Stat. 
 
The use of deadly force is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably 
believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily 
harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 
 
1. 
another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 
 
2. 
any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 
 
3. 
any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon or in any dwelling, 
residence, or vehicle occupied by [him] [her]. 
 
 
Insert and define applicable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted 
to commit. 
 
 
Give if applicable.  §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla. Stat. 
 
A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably 
believes that such force is necessary to prevent 
 
1. 
imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or 
another, or 
 
2. 
the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against 
[himself] [herself] or another. 
 
Insert and define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim 
was about to commit. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 
  
 
- 8 - 
 
Aggressor.  § 776.041, Fla. Stat. 
 
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: 
 
 
Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony.  
See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 
1. 
(Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping 
after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or 
 
 
Define applicable forcible felony.  Define after paragraph 2 if both 
paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 
2. 
(Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] 
[herself], unless: 
 
a. 
The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that 
[he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in 
imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had 
exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, 
other than using deadly force on (assailant). 
 
b. 
In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact 
with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] 
[she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, 
but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. 
 
 
Force in resisting a law enforcement officer arrest.  § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. 
 
A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law 
enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in 
the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good 
faith and he or she who is known to be, or reasonably appears, to be a law 
enforcement officer. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a 
person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] 
(or another), but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is 
necessary.  See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st 
DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). 
 
 
In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 
776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. 
 
- 9 - 
 
 
Read in all cases. 
 
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, 
you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was 
surrounded at the time the force was used.  The danger facing the defendant 
need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the 
appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and 
prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the 
danger could be avoided only through the use of that force.  Based upon 
appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was 
real. 
 
 
No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat.  See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 
520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)  regarding unlawful activity.  There is no duty to retreat 
where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the 
crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification. 
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was 
attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty 
to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with 
force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was 
necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] 
[another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. 
 
Define applicable forcible felony from list in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. that 
defendant alleges victim was about to commit. 
 
Presumption of Fear (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle).  Give if 
applicable.  § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat.  See exceptions in § 776.013 (2), Fla. 
Stat., which may negate the giving of this instruction. 
If the defendant was in a(n)[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] 
where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] is presumed to have had a 
reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] 
[another] if (victim) had [unlawfully and forcibly entered] [removed or 
attempted to remove another person against that person’s will from] that 
[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to 
believe that had occurred.  The defendant had no duty to retreat under such 
circumstances. 
 
 
Exceptions to Presumption of Fear. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat.  Give as 
applicable.   
 
- 10 - 
 
The presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily 
harm does not apply if: 
 
a. 
the person against whom the defensive force is used has the right 
 
to be in [or is a lawful resident of the [dwelling] [residence]] [the 
 
vehicle], such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not 
 
an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written 
 
pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or 
 
b. 
the person or persons sought to be removed is a child or 
 
grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the 
 
lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive 
 
force is used; or 
 
c.   
the person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful 
      
activity or is using the [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] to 
      
further an unlawful activity; or 
 
 
d. 
the person against whom the defensive force is used is a law 
       
enforcement officer, who enters or attempts to enter a [dwelling] 
       
[residence] [vehicle] in the performance of [his] [her] official 
 
duties and the officer identified [himself] [herself] in accordance 
 
with any applicable law or the person using the force knew or 
 
reasonably should have known that the person entering or 
 
attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer. 
 
If requested, give definition of “law enforcement officer” from 
 
§ 943.10(14), Fla. Stat.,     
 
 
 
§ 776.013(4), Fla. Stat.   
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter 
another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so 
with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. 
 
Definitions.  Give if applicable. § 776.013(5), Fla. Stat.   
As used with regard to self defense: 
 
 
“Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any 
attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or 
 
- 11 - 
permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, 
and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. 
 
 
“Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either 
temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. 
 
 
“Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, 
which is designed to transport people or property. 
 
 
Define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to 
commit. 
 
 
Prior threats.  Give if applicable. 
 
If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior 
difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was 
in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim), then the 
defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself].  However, the defendant 
cannot justify the use of deadly force, if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] 
[she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have 
avoided the difficulty, although as previously explained if the defendant was 
not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where [he] 
[she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat. 
 
 
Reputation of victim.  Give if applicable. 
 
If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and 
dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, 
you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the 
defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of 
that reputation. 
 
 
Physical abilities.  Read in all cases. 
 
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the 
relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). 
 
Read in all cases. 
 
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a 
reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the 
use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. 
 
 
- 12 - 
 
However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was 
not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all 
the elements of the charge have been proved. 
 
Comment 
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and was amended in 1985 [477 So. 2d 
985], 1999 [732 So. 2d 1044], 2000 [789 So. 2d 984], 2005 [911 So. 2d 766], 2006 
[930 So. 2d 612], and 2010. 
 
 
 
 
- 13 - 
3.6(g)  JUSTIFIABLE USE OF NON-DEADLY FORCE 
 
 
Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those 
parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. 
 
 
Read in all cases. 
 
An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense.  It is 
a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] 
[injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of non-deadly force. 
 
 
Definition. 
 
“Non-deadly” force means force not likely to cause death or great bodily 
harm. 
   
In defense of person.  § 776.012, Fla. Stat.  Give if applicable. 
(Defendant) would be justified in using non-deadly force against (victim) 
if the following two facts are proved: 
 
1. 
(Defendant) must have reasonably believed that such conduct was 
necessary to defend [himself] [herself] [another] against (victim’s) 
imminent use of unlawful force against the [defendant] [another 
person]. 
 
2. 
The use of unlawful force by (victim) must have appeared to 
(defendant) to be ready to take place. 
 
In defense of property.  § 776.031, Fla. Stat.  Give if applicable. 
 
(Defendant) would be justified in using non-deadly force against (victim) 
if the following three facts are proved: 
 
1. 
(Victim) must have been trespassing or otherwise wrongfully 
interfering with land or personal property. 
 
2. 
The land or personal property must have lawfully been in 
(defendant’s) possession, or in the possession of a member of [his] 
[her] immediate family or household, or in the possession of some 
person whose property [he] [she] was under a legal duty to 
protect. 
 
 
- 14 - 
3. 
(Defendant) must have reasonably believed that [his] [her] use of 
force was necessary to prevent or terminate (victim’s) wrongful 
behavior. 
 
No duty to retreat (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle).  Give if 
applicable. 
 
If the defendant is in [his] [her] [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] 
[he] [she] is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of 
death or bodily injury to [himself] [herself] [another] if (victim) has 
[unlawfully and forcibly entered] [has removed or attempted to remove 
another person against that person’s will from] that [dwelling] [residence] 
[occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to believe that had occurred.  
The defendant had no duty to retreat under such circumstances. 
 
 
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter 
another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so 
with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. 
 
 
No duty to retreat (location other than dwelling, residence, or occupied 
vehicle).  Give if applicable.  See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 
2008)  regarding unlawful activity.  There is no duty to retreat where the defendant 
was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the 
defendant  asserts the justification. 
 
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was 
attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty 
to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet  force with 
force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was 
necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] 
[another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. 
 
 
Definitions. 
 
As used with regard to self defense, 
 
“Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any 
attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or 
permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, 
and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. 
 
“Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either 
temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. 
 
- 15 - 
 
“Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, 
which is designed to transport people or property. 
 
 
Define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to 
commit. 
 
 
Give in all cases. 
 
A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where 
[he] [she] has a right to be. 
 
 
Aggressor.  § 776.041, Fla. Stat. 
 
The use of non-deadly force is not justified if you find: 
 
 
Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony.  
See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 
1. 
(Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping 
after the commission of a (applicable forcible felony). 
 
 
Define applicable forcible felony. 
2. 
(Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] 
[herself], unless: 
 
a.  
The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that 
[he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in 
imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had 
exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, 
other than using non-deadly force on (assailant). 
 
b. 
In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact 
with (assailant) and indicated clearly to (assailant) that [he] 
[she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of non-deadly 
force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. 
 
 
Force in resisting a law enforcement officer arrest.  § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. 
 
A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law 
enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in 
the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good 
faith and he or she who is known to be, or reasonably appears, to be a law 
enforcement officer. 
 
- 16 - 
 
 
Give the following instruction if applicable. 
 
However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a 
person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] 
[another], but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is 
necessary.  See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st 
DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). 
 
 
In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 
776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. 
 
 
Read in all cases. 
 
In deciding whether the defendant was justified in the use of non-deadly 
force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] 
was surrounded at the time the force was used.  The danger facing the 
defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of non-deadly 
force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably 
cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have 
believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force.  
Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the 
danger was real. 
 
 
Reputation of victim.  Give if applicable. 
 
If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and 
dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, 
you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the 
defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of 
that reputation. 
 
 
Physical abilities.  Read in all cases. 
 
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the 
relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). 
 
 
Read in all cases. 
 
If, in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a 
reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the 
use of non-deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. 
 
 
- 17 - 
 
However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was 
not justified in the use of non-deadly force, then you should find [him] [her] 
guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. 
 
Comment  
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and was amended in 1985 [477 So. 2d 985], 
1992 [603 So. 2d 1175], 2005 [911 So. 2d 766], 2006 [930 So. 2d 612], and 2010. 
 
 
- 18 - 
3.6(h) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE 
BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 
 
 
In making an arrest of a felon. § 776.05, Fla. Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
A law enforcement officer, or any person [he] [she] has summoned or 
directed to assist [him] [her], need not retreat from or stop efforts to make a 
lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. The 
officer is justified in the use of any force that [he] [she] reasonably believes 
necessary to defend [himself] [herself] or another from bodily harm while 
making the arrest. That force is also justifiable when necessarily used: 
 
1. 
in retaking a felon who has escaped or 
 
2. 
in arresting a felon who is fleeing from justice. 
 
 
Force in making unlawful arrest or unlawful execution of a legal duty 
prohibited . § 776.051(2), Fla. Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
Use of any force by a law enforcement officer or any person summoned 
or directed to assist the law enforcement officer is not justified if 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
1. 
the [arrest] [execution of a legal duty] is unlawful and 
 
2. 
it is known by the officer or the person assisting [him] [her] to be 
unlawful. 
 
 
To prevent escape from custody. § 776.07(1), Fla. Stat. Give if applicable. 
 
A law enforcement officer or other person who has an arrested person 
in [his] [her] custody is justified in the use of any force that [he] [she] 
reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent the escape of the arrested 
person from custody. 
 
 
To prevent escape from penal institution. § 776.07(2), Fla. Stat. Give if 
applicable. 
 
A guard or other law enforcement officer is justified in the use of any 
force that [he] [she] reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent an escape 
from a penal institution of a person the officer reasonably believes is lawfully 
detained. 
 
 
Give if applicable. 
 
- 19 - 
 
"Deadly force" includes, but is not limited to 
 
1. 
firing a firearm in the direction of the person to be arrested, even 
though no intent exists to kill or inflict great bodily harm; and § 
776.06(1)(a), Fla. Stat. 
 
2. 
firing a firearm at a vehicle in which the person to be arrested is 
riding. § 776.06(1)(b), Fla. Stat. 
 
 
Definition. Give if applicable. 
 
A "firearm" is legally defined as (adapt from § 790.001(6), Fla. Stat., as 
required by allegations). 
 
Comment 
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 1981 and was amended in March 1989, and 
March 2004, and 2010. 
 
 
 
- 20 - 
11.14(e) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER 
(Failure to Report Change of Residence to Another State or Jurisdiction) 
§ 943.0435(7), Fla. Stat. 
 
To prove the crime of Failure to Report Change of Address as a Sexual 
Offender, the State must prove the following [four] [five] elements beyond a 
reasonable doubt: 
 
Give 1a or 1b as applicable. 
 
1. 
(Defendant)  
 
 
 
a. 
is a sexual offender.  
 
b. 
has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted 
as a sexual offender; therefore, you should consider the 
sexual offender status element as proven by agreement of 
the parties. 
 
 
If the defendant offers to stipulate, the court must accept the offer after 
conducting an on-the-record colloquy with the defendant.  See Brown v. State, 719 
So. 2d 882 (Fla. 1998); Johnson v. State, 842 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).  If 
there is a stipulation, the court should not give the definition of “sexual offender” 
or “convicted.” 
 
2. 
(Defendant) [established] [maintains] [maintained] a permanent or 
temporary residence in (name of county) County, Florida. 
 
3. 
(Defendant) intended to leave this State to establish residence in 
another state or jurisdiction on (date). 
 
 
Give element 4 or 5, or both, as applicable. 
4. 
(Defendant) knowingly failed to report in person to an office of the 
sheriff in the county of [his] [her] current residence within 48 
hours before the date on which [he] [she] intended to leave this 
state to establish residence in another state or jurisdiction. 
 
5. 
(Defendant) knowingly failed to provide the address, municipality, 
county, and state of [his] [her] intended address, when [he] [she] 
reported to the sheriff’s office of the county of [his] [her] current 
 
- 21 - 
residence [his] [her] intention to establish residence in another 
state or jurisdiction. 
 
 
Definitions.  See instruction 11.14(h) for the applicable definitions. 
 
Lesser Included Offenses 
 
 
No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense. 
 
Comment 
 
 
This instruction was adopted in 2008 and amended in 2010.