Home
Menu
Call outside Criminal Attorney Mark S. Barnett
904-562-8444
F.S. 893.10 on Google Scholar

F.S. 893.10 on Casetext

Amendments to 893.10


The 2021 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 893
DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 893.10 Florida Statutes and Case Law
893.10 Burden of proof; photograph or video recording of evidence.
(1) It is not necessary for the state to negative any exemption or exception set forth in this chapter in any indictment, information, or other pleading or in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding under this chapter, and the burden of going forward with the evidence with respect to any exemption or exception is upon the person claiming its benefit.
(2) In the prosecution of an offense involving the manufacture of a controlled substance, a photograph or video recording of the manufacturing equipment used in committing the offense, including, but not limited to, grow lights, growing trays, and chemical fertilizers, may be introduced as competent evidence of the existence and use of the equipment and is admissible in the prosecution of the offense to the same extent as if the property were introduced as evidence.
(3) After a law enforcement agency documents the manufacturing equipment by photography or video recording, the manufacturing equipment may be destroyed on site and left in disrepair. The law enforcement agency destroying the equipment is immune from civil liability for the destruction of the equipment. The destruction of the equipment must be recorded by the supervising law enforcement officer in the manner described in s. 893.12(1)(a), and records must be maintained for 24 months.
History.s. 10, ch. 73-331; s. 1442, ch. 97-102; s. 3, ch. 2008-184; s. 19, ch. 2010-117.

Statutes updated from Official Statutes on: January 26, 2022
F.S. 893.10 on Google Scholar

F.S. 893.10 on Casetext

Amendments to 893.10


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 893.10
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 893.10.


Civil Citations / Citable Offenses under S893.10
R or S next to points is Mandatory Revocation or Suspension

Current data shows no reason a civil citation or a suspension or revocation of license should have been issued under Florida Statute 893.10.


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

  1. Purifoy v. State

    359 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 1978)   Cited 32 times
    The crucial difference between an 893.02(2) exclusion and 893.10(1) exemption (or exception) is that one who claims the benefits of the latter in effect admits possession of the contraband but claims that his possession was expressly authorized by law. In contrast, defendants (such as Purifoy) who claim the benefit of the former deny that the matter in their possession is a prohibited substance. In other words, Section 893.10(1) provides an excuse for what would otherwise be criminal conduct, and the burden of establishing that excuse properly rests as a matter of defense on the individual claiming it since there is nothing to excuse until the state has proven the elements of a crime. Section 893.02(2), however, simply tests whether particular conduct is in fact criminal. To ignore this distinction is to relieve the state of proving an essential element of the crime and to require the accused to establish his innocence. We must reject the latter construction of the statute for obvious constitutional reasons, and because there is no indication the legislature intended the effect that it would produce.
    PAGE 449
  2. In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—instructions

    112 So. 3d 1211 (Fla. 2013)   Cited 2 times
    (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. § 893.101, Fla. Stat. (2012). At the same time, the Legislature did not amend section 893.10, which applies to all of chapter 893. Section 893.10 is entitled “Burden of Proof; photograph or video recording of evidence” and provides in pertinent part as follows:
    PAGE 166
  3. Petropoulos v. City of West Allis

    148 Wis. 2d 762 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 6 times
    The City raises several issues before this court, however one is dispositive. That issue is whether sec. 893.10, Stats. (1977), bars Petropoulos' claim of adverse possession. We conclude that it does and reverse the trial court.
    PAGE 766
  4. Lone Pine Owners Asso. v. Pellett

    803 N.W.2d 867 (Wis. Ct. App. 2011)
    ¶ 25 Finally, in Soma , 321 Wis. 2d 91, ¶ 9, this court noted that the question of whether circuit courts have equitable authority, apart from WIS. STAT. § 893.10, to order a forced sale was implicitly resolved by Perpignani . Although the legislature may have intended to prohibit forced sales that did not comply with § 893.10, we concluded we were bound by Perpignani 's holding and any arguable inconsistency between that holding and § 893.10 was to be addressed by the supreme court or the legislature. Soma , 321 Wis. 2d 91, ¶ 11. A court's general powers of equity, as well as its authority under WIS. STAT. ch. 844, permit it to order a forced sale when equity demands. Id. , ¶ 10.
    PAGE 9
  5. Lindl v. Ozanne

    270 N.W.2d 249 (Wis. Ct. App. 1978)   Cited 6 times
    The trial court found that the disputed parcel had been protected by a substantial inclosure and that it had been cultivated for more than twenty years by the Doreys' and the Lindls' tenant. The court concluded that the Lindls had thereby established their title in the parcel pursuant to sec. 893.10 (2), Stats., which provides:
    PAGE 427
  6. In re Standard Jury Instructions

    No. SC11-2517 (Fla. Nov. 21, 2012)
    Like all affirmative defenses and pursuant to § 893.10(1), Fla. Stat., the burden of going forward with evidence of the defense is upon the defendant. Fla. Stats. 893.10(1), 893.13(6)(a), and 499.03(1) are silent, however, as to the burden of persuasion for the affirmative defense.
    PAGE 7
  7. Dept. of Transp. v. Black Angus Steak House

    330 N.W.2d 240 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 2 times
    Adverse possession under sec. 893.10, Stats. (1977), is a defense to an encroachment action taken pursuant to sec. 86.04. Section 893.10, Stats. (1977), states in pertinent part:
    PAGE 345
  8. GFT used the $261, 893.10 to pay off a “$555, 000 R.U.S. Note.” Doc. No. 32, p. 6; Doc. No. 32-6, p. 1.
    PAGE 4
  9. In re Standard Jury Instructions

    141 So. 3d 132 (Fla. 2013)
    Like all affirmative defenses and pursuant to § 893.10(1), Fla. Stat., the burden of going forward with evidence of the defense is upon the defendant. Fla. Stats. 893.10(1), 893.13(6)(a), and 499.03(1) are silent, however, as to the burden of persuasion for the affirmative defense.
    PAGE 135