Home
Menu
Call outside Criminal Attorney Mark S. Barnett
904-562-8444
F.S. 893.1351 on Google Scholar

F.S. 893.1351 on Casetext

Amendments to 893.1351


The 2021 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 893
DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 893.1351 Florida Statutes and Case Law
893.1351 Ownership, lease, rental, or possession for trafficking in or manufacturing a controlled substance.
(1) A person may not own, lease, or rent any place, structure, or part thereof, trailer, or other conveyance with the knowledge that the place, structure, trailer, or conveyance will be used for the purpose of trafficking in a controlled substance, as provided in s. 893.135; for the sale of a controlled substance, as provided in s. 893.13; or for the manufacture of a controlled substance intended for sale or distribution to another. A person who violates this subsection commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(2) A person may not knowingly be in actual or constructive possession of any place, structure, or part thereof, trailer, or other conveyance with the knowledge that the place, structure, or part thereof, trailer, or conveyance will be used for the purpose of trafficking in a controlled substance, as provided in s. 893.135; for the sale of a controlled substance, as provided in s. 893.13; or for the manufacture of a controlled substance intended for sale or distribution to another. A person who violates this subsection commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) A person who is in actual or constructive possession of a place, structure, trailer, or conveyance with the knowledge that the place, structure, trailer, or conveyance is being used to manufacture a controlled substance intended for sale or distribution to another and who knew or should have known that a minor is present or resides in the place, structure, trailer, or conveyance commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(4) For the purposes of this section, proof of the possession of 25 or more cannabis plants constitutes prima facie evidence that the cannabis is intended for sale or distribution.
History.s. 1, ch. 91-118; s. 10, ch. 99-188; s. 22, ch. 2000-320; s. 1, ch. 2002-212; s. 14, ch. 2005-128; s. 2, ch. 2008-184; s. 43, ch. 2016-105; s. 125, ch. 2019-167.

Statutes updated from Official Statutes on: January 26, 2022
F.S. 893.1351 on Google Scholar

F.S. 893.1351 on Casetext

Amendments to 893.1351


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 893.1351
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

893.1351 1 - DRUGS-TRAFFIC - OWN RENT STRUCTURE VEH KNOW TRAFFIC DRUGS - F: T
893.1351 1 - DRUGS-SELL - OWN RENT STRUCTURE VEH KNOW SELL DRUGS - F: T
893.1351 1 - DRUGS-PRODUCE - OWN RENT STRUCTURE VEH KNOW DRUGS MFGRD - F: T
893.1351 2 - DRUGS-TRAFFIC - POSSESS STRUCTURE VEH KNOW TRAFFIC DRUGS - F: S
893.1351 2 - DRUGS-SELL - POSSESS STRUCTURE VEH KNOW SELL DRUGS - F: S
893.1351 2 - DRUGS-PRODUCE - POSSESS STRUCTURE VEH KNOW DRUGS MFGRD - F: S
893.1351 3 - DRUGS-PRODUCE - POSS STRUCT VEH KNOW DRUGS MFGRD MINOR PRESENT - F: F


Civil Citations / Citable Offenses under S893.1351
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 893.1351.


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

  1. The crimes in §§ 893.1351(1). and 893.1351(2), Fla. Stats. are not necessary lesser included offenses because they have an element that is 1101 present in § 893.1351(3), Fla. Stat. Specifically. § 893.1351(1) and (2). Ha. Stats., require that the place will be used for certain drug-related activity while § 893.1351(3). Fla. Stat. requires that the place way being used to manufacture a controlled substance. See Zeigler V. State, 198 So.3d 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
    PAGE 64
  2. Thames v. State

    230 So. 3d 566 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 1 times
    Section 893.1351(2) contains two separate elements regarding knowledge that the State must prove to obtain a conviction. First, the State must establish that the accused's possession of the place, structure, trailer, or conveyance was undertaken "knowingly." Id. Second, the State must also prove that such possession was undertaken "with the knowledge" that the place, structure, trailer, or conveyance will be used for a prohibited purpose as described in the statute. Id.; see Notice, Amendments to Jury Instructions, Fla. Bar News, Jan. 15, 2017, at 21 (proposing a new jury instruction 25.13(g) for the offense set forth in section 893.1351(2)). I will refer to the first element as the "conscious purpose" requirement and the second element as the "guilty knowledge" requirement.
    PAGE 572
  3. Delgado-George v. State

    125 So. 3d 1031 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 5 times
    At issue in this case is whether Delgado–George's actions violated section 893.1351(2). Section 893.1351(2) provides, in pertinent part:
    PAGE 1033
  4. Norwood v. State

    Case No. 5D18-3077 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2019)
    George Norwood was convicted of trafficking of a controlled substance, i.e., morphine, in violation of section 893.135, Florida Statutes (2017), and of knowing possession of a conveyance used for trafficking in violation of section 893.1351, Florida Statutes (2017). He appeals only the latter conviction, relying upon the concept of fundamental error based upon a claimed lack of evidence. We affirm his conviction, and explain why below.
    PAGE 2
  5. Zeigler v. State

    198 So. 3d 1005 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 2 times
    Defendant, Bobby Lee Zeigler, raises issues regarding his convictions on multiple counts, including the charge that he violated section 893.1351(2), Florida Statutes, which criminalizes the possession of a place, structure, or conveyance knowing that it “will be used” in the trafficking, sale, or manufacture of a controlled substance that is meant for sale or distribution to others. Zeigler's trial counsel did not object (or provide an alternative) to the jury instruction on this charge, which stated:
    PAGE 1006
  6. A special instruction will be required if the defense is that the defendant did not know of the illicit nature of the controlled substance. See § 893.101, Fla. Stat. § 893.1351(1), Florida Statutes, requires that the place will be used for certain drug-related activity while § 893.1351(3), Florida Statutes, requires that the place was being used to manufacture a controlled substance. See Zeigler v. State , 198 So.3d 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
    PAGE 203
  7. Hunt v. State

    256 So. 3d 243 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 4 times
    Section 893.1351(2), Florida Statutes (2016), provides that "[a] person may not knowingly be in actual or constructive possession of any ... conveyance with the knowledge that the ... conveyance will be used for the purpose of trafficking in a controlled substance." (Emphasis added.) " ‘[W]ill be used’ is the operative language of section 893.1351(2). Thus ... the focus should be on the use of the vehicle in the sale. In other words, the true intent at issue under the statute is the use the accused intended for the vehicle." Delgado-George v. State, 125 So.3d 1031, 1033-34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (alteration in original).
    PAGE 245
  8. Jenkins v. State

    295 So. 3d 792 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020)
    For the sixth issue, Jenkins argues the court's oral pronouncement found him in violation of condition 5 of probation for committing a law offense not charged in the violation of probation affidavit. See Grant v. State , 137 So. 3d 436, 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) ("It is well settled that the written order of revocation of probation must conform to the oral pronouncements made at the revocation hearing by the trial judge." (quoting Harrington v. State , 570 So. 2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) )); Harrington , 570 So. 2d at 1142 (stating that a "defendant's probation may not be revoked for conduct not charged in the affidavit alleging a violation of probation" (citing Moser v. State , 523 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) )). The court orally found Jenkins guilty of possessing a home used for trafficking or sale of controlled substances. See § 893.1351( 2), Fla. Stat. (2018). But the violation of probation affidavit charged Jenkins with "owning, leasing, or renting" the home, which is a different criminal offense. See § 893.1351( 1), Fla. Stat. (2018). Despite this error, the record is clear that the circuit court would have revoked probation and imposed the same…
    PAGE 793
  9. Morris v. State

    264 So. 3d 1036 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
    In Delgado-George, the defendant was pulled over during a traffic stop and admitted to the officer that he was on his way to a local bar to sell marijuana. 125 So.3d at 1033. This court held that a judgment of acquittal should have been granted because there was no evidence that the vehicle was a necessary component of the intended drug sale or that there was anything "unique about th[e] vehicle that would indicate its intended use was to traffic, sell, or manufacture controlled substances." Id. at 1034. This court concluded that the State failed to show that a crime was committed under section 893.1351(2) because the evidence was insufficient to prove a nexus between the defendant's intent to sell and the use of the vehicle. Id.
    PAGE 1038
  10. Agresta v. City of Maitland

    159 So. 3d 876 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Applying these factors, I cannot conclude that the forfeiture of Farley's property is grossly disproportional to the gravity of his offense. Clearly, the Legislature considered Farley's offenses to be serious transgressions. As charged, he faced up to forty-seven years in prison. Two of the charges, manufacturing cannabis within 1,000 feet of a school and ownership or possession [of property] for trafficking in or manufacturing a controlled substance, can hardly be considered insignificant, as both are second-degree felonies punishable by up to fifteen years in prison and carry with them fines of $10,000. See §§ 893.13(1)(c); 893.1351(2), Fla. Stat. (2008). The Legislature has also made clear that real property used in the commission of the felonies described above is contraband subject to forfeiture under the FCFA. See §§ 893.12(2)(b); 932.701(2)(a)6., Fla. Stat. (2008).
    PAGE 881