Cases from cite.case.law:

STATE v. McELDOWNEY,, 99 So. 3d 610 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . The State appeals from a final county court order declaring section 316.1905(3)(b), Florida Statutes . . . Section 316.1905(S)(b) creates a rebutta-ble presumption that a speed measuring device used by law enforcement . . . Although 316.1905(3)(b) does appear to be a procedural presumption affecting the burden of production . . . In upholding section 316.1905(3)(b), we also note that the rebuttable presumption created by that section . . . We agree with the State's assertion that 316.1905(3)(b) merely creates an evidentiary presumption that . . .

UNITED STATES v. ROWLS, a. k. a. E, 402 F. App'x 467 (11th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 316.1905(1); Fla. Admin. Code Ann. r. 15B-2.011. . . .

MATOS, v. STATE, 899 So. 2d 403 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . United States, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (D.C.Cir.1923), and under the Florida speed recording statute, section 316.1905 . . . Section 316.1905(1)(2002), Florida Statutes, in pertinent part, states: Whenever any peace officer engaged . . . Section 316.1905(2) and section 316.1906, discussing the admissibility of radar speed-measuring devices . . . We can discern no legislative intent to apply section 316.1905(1) to the SDM. AFFIRMED. . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, v. NELSON,, 823 So. 2d 828 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . allowed to testify concerning Nelson’s speed “unless the proper predicate [was] laid pursuant to § 316.1905 . . .

STATE v. JOY,, 637 So. 2d 946 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . fact that the speedometer in the officer’s patrol vehicle was not certified as required by section 316.1905 . . .

In FORFEITURE OF U. S. CURRENCY, 576 So. 2d 424 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Clearly, under section 316.1905, Florida Statutes (1989), the testifying officer could stop the offending . . .

KING v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 42 Fla. Supp. 2d 94 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1990)

. . . radar device used had not been tested within the six month time limit prescribed by Florida Statute § 316.1905 . . . immediately following the citation, Olsen had tested the radar device in accordance with Florida Statutes § 316.1905 . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA v. FAIRFULL, 31 Fla. Supp. 2d 142 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1988)

. . . As to the first point, FS §316.1905, provides the standards for admissibility of the readings of radar . . .

STATE v. BROWN, 28 Fla. Supp. 2d 46 (Volusia Cty. Ct. 1988)

. . . Section 316.1905(1), (3)(a) and (b), Fla. . . .

TEGNELIA v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 23 Fla. Supp. 2d 149 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987)

. . . . § 316.1905. . . . When the Chapter 15B-2 regulations and the statutory provisions of F.S. § 316.1905 are considered in . . .

ELLIOT v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 8 Fla. Supp. 2d 54 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1983)

. . . for the officer to produce each and every six month certificate as specified under Florida Statute 316.1905 . . .

YOLMAN, v. STATE, 388 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1980)

. . . The primary issue concerns the authority of the legislature to direct, by section 316.1905, the Department . . . relating to electronic speed control devices (radar) and Florida Statutes, Chapter 316.058, renumbered 316.1905 . . . Section 316.1905 provides that any officer engaged in the enforcement of speed laws who uses an electronic . . . We find section 316.1905, Florida Statutes (1977), and the implementing administrative rules constitutional . . . J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, ALDERMAN and MCDONALD, JJ., concur. . 316.1905 Electrical, mechanical, . . .

PERRUZZI v. STATE, 49 Fla. Supp. 206 (Flagler Cty. Cir. Ct. 1979)

. . . calibrated as required by law,” but there was not introduced into evidence the certificate contemplated by 316.1905 . . . violation of due process to convict a defendant based on radar evidence when the requirements of Sec. 316.1905 . . .

STATE v. BECKER, 48 Fla. Supp. 153 (Dade Cty. Ct. 1978)

. . . A certificate, properly witnessed and authenticated, was received in evidence pursuant to F.S. 316.1905 . . . Here, the certificate of testing called for by F.S. 316.1905(3) (b) was prima facie evidence of such . . . F.S. 316.1905 requires a test for accuracy not less than once every six months, to be conducted according . . . 15B-2 is to equate the calibration referred to therein with the test for accuracy referred to in F.S. 316.1905 . . .

STATE v. VILLACI, 47 Fla. Supp. 80 (Dade Cty. Ct. 1978)

. . . of defendant’s speed because the radar device had not been tested in conformity with Florida Statute 316.1905 . . . F.S. 316.1905(1) assigns the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles with the responsibility . . .