Amendments to 843.15

1. Williams v. State

   500 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1986)   Cited 111 times

   Section 843.15, Florida Statutes (1985), provides in part:

   PAGE 503
2. Corrales v. State

   84 So. 3d 406 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 1 times

   To convict under section 843.15(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2009), requires proof of willfulness beyond a reasonable doubt. See Williams v. State, 876 So.2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). While there is no standard jury instruction for offenses under section 843.15, we upheld the use of an instruction in one prosecution under section 843.15 in which the jury was told that "[w]illfully means intentionally, knowingly, and purposely." Patterson v. State, 512 So.2d 1109, 1109–10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). The willfulness requirement assures that "no one will be convicted of a crime because of a mistake or because he does something innocently, not realizing what he was doing." United States v. Hall, 346 F.2d 875, 879 (2d Cir.1965) (approving trial judge's response to jury's question concerning meaning of willfulness).

   PAGE 408
3. McGee v. State

   438 So. 2d 127 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 14 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   There are few Florida decisions construing § 843.15, Florida Statutes, and none dealing with this theory of willful evasion; but the decisions that construe and apply substantially similar provisions in the federal bail bond jumping statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3150, are persuasive. The federal courts have repeatedly held that receipt of actual notice by the defendant is not necessary in order to prove the required willfulness. "A defendant's failure to appear because he purposefully engaged in a course of conduct designed to prevent him from receiving notice to appear can clearly be as `willful' as when he receives and deliberately ignores a notice to appear." United States v. Cohen, 450 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1971); United States v. Bright, 541 F.2d 471, 476 (5th Cir. 1976), reh. denied, 544 F.2d 518 (5th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 935, 97 S.Ct. 1560, 51 L.Ed.2d 780; United States v. DePugh, 434 F.2d 548 (8th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 978, 91 S.Ct. 1208, 28 L.Ed.2d 328. We believe the reasoning underlying that rule to be valid and agree that it should be applied to prosecutions under § 843.15, Florida Statutes. Accordingly, we find no error in the…

   PAGE 130
4. English v. State

   667 So. 2d 506 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 1 times

   While he was properly convicted of the felony charge, there is a typographical error in the record. The judgment properly states he entered a plea of guilty to "Failure To Appear" under " 843.15(1)(a)," a "3F" crime. However, the probation documents are incorrect. Both the "Order Withholding Adjudication of Guilt and Placing Defendant on Probation" and the "Order of Modification of Probation" state that he pled guilty to section 843.15(1)(b), the misdemeanor subsection. Therefore, the typographical error in the probation orders which states that the defendant violated " 843.15(1)(b)" is hereby changed to " 843.15(1)(a)."
5. Rodriguez v. State

   224 So. 3d 811 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

   Section 843.15, Florida Statutes (2014), provides, in relevant part:

   PAGE 814
6. Rahmings v. State

   660 So. 2d 1390 (Fla. 1995)   Cited 8 times

   In the present case, the State was free to prosecute Rahmings' failure to appear under section 843.15, in which instance the State has the burden of proving that she "willfully" failed to appear. See § 843.15, Fla. Stat. (1993).

   PAGE 1392
7. Giordano v. State

   32 So. 3d 96 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 2 times

   Apparently, the State chose not to proceed pursuant to section 843.15(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which provides that failure to appear before a court may be prosecuted as a separate crime. Instead, Giordano's failure to appear was handled pursuant to section 843.15(2), which provides that "[n]othing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of its power to punish for contempt" (emphasis added), but not specifying the classification or the penalty.

   PAGE 99
8. Wash. v. Saul

   Civil Action 17-8734 (E.D. La. May. 20, 2021)   Cited 1 times

   • Motion for summary judgment

   For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that Plaintiffs petition for attorneys fees be granted and that the requested fee of $35, 843.15 be approved.
9. Williams v. State

   876 So. 2d 27 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 3 times

   Appellant seeks review of his conviction and sentence for failure to appear under section 843.15(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003). The state properly concedes error and we reverse.
10. Patterson v. State

    512 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)   Cited 26 times

    Although there is no standard instruction on offenses under Section 843.15, the Florida Standard Jury Instructions In Criminal Cases, Second Edition, does include the following definitions of "willfully" under the crimes of criminal mischief and trespass at pages 130 and 141, respectively, of the Standard Instructions:

    PAGE 1110