The Florida Bar
www.floridabar.org
The Florida Bar News
click to print this page  click to e-mail the address for this page 
September 1, 2013
Amendments to sexual offender/predator jury instructions

The Supreme Court Committee On Standard Jury Instructions In Criminal Cases submits the following amended and new instructions to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases for comment. The committee proposes the following instructions:

11.14 FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Initially Register, Report, or Provide Registration Items)

11.14(a) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS

11.14(b) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS

11.14(c) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS. (Failure to Report to Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles)

11.14(d) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Change of Name or Address within the State or Jurisdiction)

11.14(e) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Change of Residence to Another State or Jurisdiction)

11.14(f) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Intent to Remain within the State or Jurisdiction)

11.14(g) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Twice a Year/Failure to Report Quarterly)

11.15 FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL PREDATOR (Initially Register – In Custody, Control or under the Supervision of the Department of Corrections)

11.15(a) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL PREDATOR (Initially Register – Not in Custody, Control or under Supervision of the Department of Corrections or a Private Correctional Facility)

11.15(b) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDITOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Comply with Registration RequirementsProvide Required Information)

11.15(c) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Comply with Registration of a Residence, Motor Vehicle, Trailer, Mobile Home, or Manufactured Home)

11.15(d) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Comply with Registration of Enrollment or Employment in Institutions of Higher Education)

11.15(e) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report to Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles)

11.15(f) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Provide Other Necessary Information Requested by Department of Law Enforcement)

11.15(g) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Change of Name or Address within the State or Jurisdiction)

11.15(h) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Respond To Address Verification Correspondence)

11.15(i) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Intent to Move to Another State or Jurisdiction)

11.15(j) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Report Intent to Remain within the State or Jurisdiction)

11.15(k) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Register Quarterly)

The committee invites all interested persons to comment on the proposals, reproduced in full below. Comments must be received by the committee in either hard copy or electronic format on or before September 30, 2013.

The committee will review all comments received in response to the above proposal at its next meeting and will consider amendments based upon the comments received. Upon final approval of the instruction, the committee will make a recommendation to the Florida Supreme Court.

File your comments electronically to CrimJuryInst@flcourts.org, in the format of a Word document or, mail a hard copy of your comments to: Standard Jury Instructions Committee in Criminal Cases, c/o Mr. Bart Schneider, General Counsel’s Office Office of the State Courts Administrator, 500 S. Duval Street, Tallahassee 32399-1900.

11.14 FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
(Initially Register, Report, or Provide Registration Items)
§ 943.0435(2)(a)-(b), Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three 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 an 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

      Give 3a, 3b, 3c, or 3d as applicable.
            3. (Defendant)
                a. knowingly failed to register in person at an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County within 48 hours after establishing permanent, temporary, or transient residence within this state.
                b. knowingly failed to report in person at an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County within 48 hours after being released from the [custody, control, or supervision of the Florida Department of Corrections] [custody of a private correctional facility].
                c. knowingly failed to register in person at an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County within 48 hours after having been convicted by a court in that county of an offense requiring registration.
                d. knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with [his] [her] [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: [his] [her] (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).]
      Read only if the defendant is charged with failing to provide a physical residential address.
      The defendant shall provide a physical residential address. A post office box shall not be provided in lieu of a physical residential address.

      Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
      It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

      There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
      The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.


      If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
      If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
      If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find (defendant) guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.


      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 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 3d 754], and 2014.
      11.14(a) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
      (Failure to Comply with Registration of a Residence, Motor Vehicle, Trailer, Mobile Home, Manufactured Home, Vessel, or Houseboat)
      § 943.0435(2)(b)1, Fla. Stat.

      To prove the crime of Failure to Register as a Sexual Offender by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

      Give 1a or1b 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

      Give 3a or 3b as applicable.
            3. (Defendant)
                a. uses as [his] [her] place of residence a [motor vehicle] [trailer] [mobile home] [manufactured home];

              and

              knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with [the (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)] of the [motor vehicle] [trailer] [mobile home] [manufactured home] where [he] [she] resides.
                b. uses as [his] [her] place of residence a [vessel] [live-aboard vessel] [houseboat];

              and

              knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with [the (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute] of the [vessel] [live-aboard vessel] [houseboat] where [he] [she] resides.

      Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
      It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

      There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
      The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.



      If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
      If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
      If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find (defendant) guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

      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 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.
      11.14(b) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
      (Failure to Comply with Registration of Employment or
      Enrollment at an Institution of Higher Learning)
      § 943.0435(2)(b)2, Fla. Stat.

      To prove the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements as a Sexual Offender, the State must prove the following three 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

      Give 3a or 3b as applicable.
            3. (Defendant)
                a. [is] [was] enrolled, employed, or carrying on a vocation at an institution of higher education in this state, and

              knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with [(the name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).]
                b. [is] [was] enrolled, employed, or carrying on a vocation at an institution of higher education in this state.

              undertook a change in [his] [her] enrollment or employment status, and
              knowingly failed to report this change in person at an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County within 48 hours after the change.

      Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
      It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

      There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying with registration requirements, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
      The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

      If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
      If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
      If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

      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 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

      11.14(c) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS.
      (Failure to Report to Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles)
      § 943.0435(3), Fla. Stat.

      To prove the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements as a Sexual Offender, the State must prove the following three 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

      Give 3a or 3b as applicable.
            3. (Defendant)
                a. having registered as a sexual offender with an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County,

              knowingly failed to report in person to a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles within 48 hours after registering to present proof of this registration, and
                  knowingly failed to [secure a Florida driver’s license] [renew [his] [her] Florida driver’s license] [secure a Florida identification card].
                b. reported in person to a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles and [secured a Florida driver’s license] [renewed [his] [her] Florida driver’s license] [secured a Florida identification card], but in doing so,

                  Give one or both of the following as applicable to the charge.
                    i. failed to report to that office that [he] [she] was a sexual offender.
                    ii. failed to provide that office with [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)].

      Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
      It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.

      There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
      The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

      If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
      If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
      If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

      Definitions. See instruction 11.14(h) for the applicable definitions.
      Lesser Included Offenses

      No lesser included offenses have been identified.
      Comment

      This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 {85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

      11.14(d) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
      (Failure to Report Change of Name or Address within the State or Jurisdiction)
      § 943.0435(4), Fla. Stat.

      To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

      Give 3a or 3b, or 3c or 3d as applicable.
            3. (Defendant)
                a. knowingly failed to report in person to a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles,

              Give i, ii, or iii as applicable.
                  i. when [his] [her] [driver’s license] [identification card] was subject to renewal.

                  ii. within 48 hours after any change in [his] [her] permanent, temporary, or transient residence.

                  iii. within 48 hours after any change in [his] [her] name by reason of [marriage] [(specify other legal process)].
                b. knowingly failed to report in person to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County, within 48 hours of vacating [his] [her] permanent residence and failing to [establish] [maintain] another [permanent] [temporary] [transient] residence.
                c. knowingly failed to report in person to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County that [he] [she] remained at [his] [her] permanent residence, within 48 hours after [he] [she] reported to the sheriff [his] [her] intent to vacate [his] [her] permanent residence.
                d. reported to
                  Give i or ii as applicable.
                  i. an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County

                  ii. a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

      and

      Give iii or iv as applicable.
                  iii. knowingly failed to provide that office with (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute).

                  iv. knowingly failed to provide that office with any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).

      Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
      It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the [office of the sheriff] [Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles].

      There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
      The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

      If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
      If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff] [Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the[office of the sheriff] [Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

      Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
      If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [office of the sheriff] [Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the [office of the sheriff] [Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

      Definitions. See instruction 11.14(h) for the applicable definitions.

      Lesser Included Offenses

      No lesser included offenses have been identified.
      Comment

      This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

      11.14(e) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
      (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 by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient 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 residence [his] [her] intention to establish residence in another state or jurisdiction.

        Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
        It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

        There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
        The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

        If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
        If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

        Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
        If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

        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 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.


        11.14(f) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
        (Failure to Report Intent to Remain within the State or Jurisdiction)
        § 943.0435(8), Fla. Stat.

        To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
              3. (Defendant) indicated to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County [his] [her] intent to leave this state on (date of intended departure) and establish a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in another state or jurisdiction.
              4. (Defendant) later decided to remain in this state.
              5. Within 48 hours after the date of [his] [her] originally intended departure from this state, (defendant) knowingly failed to report to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County that [he] [she] instead decided to remain in this state.


        Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
        It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

        There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
        The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

        If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
        If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

        Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
        If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

        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 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

        11.14(g) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
        (Failure to Report Twice a Year/Failure to Report Quarterly)
        § 943.0435(14)(a) or (b), Fla. Stat.

        Give this statement if the charge is failure to report twice a year during the sexual offender’s birthday month and six months later pursuant to § 943.0435(14)(a), or, for certain specified violators, failure to report during the sexual offender’s birthday month and every third month thereafter pursuant to § 943.0435(14)(b).

        To prove the crime of Failure to Report [Twice a Year][Quarterly] as by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three 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] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

        Give 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, or 3e as applicable.
              3. (Defendant)
                  a. knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during [his] [her] birthday month in (year) to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
                  b. knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during the sixth month following [his] [her] (year) birthday month to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
                  c. knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during every third month following [his] [her] (year) birthday month to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
                  d. knowingly failed to respond to the address verification correspondence from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement within three weeks from the date of the correspondence.
                  e. reported to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) to reregister,
          and

          Give i or ii as applicable.
                      i. knowingly failed to provide that office with (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute).

                      ii. knowingly failed to provide that office with any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).
              Read only if the defendant is charged with failing to provide a physical residential address.
              The defendant shall provide a physical residential address. A post office box shall not be provided in lieu of a physical residential address.


          Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
          It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

          There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
          The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

          If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
          If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

          Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
          If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

          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 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 3d 754], and 2014.

          11.15 FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL PREDATOR
          (Initially Register – In Custody, Control or under the Supervision of the Department of Corrections)
          § 775.21(6)(b), Fla. Stat.

          To prove the crime of Failure to Register as a Sexual Predator, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

              Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
              1. (Defendant)
          a. is a sexual predator.
                  b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
              2. (Defendant) is [in the custody or control of the Department of Corrections] [under the supervision of the Department of Corrections] [in the custody of a private correctional facility][under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, but not incarcerated].

              3. (Defendant) [knowingly failed to register with the Department of Corrections as a sexual predator][knowingly failed to register with the Department of Corrections within 3 days of having been classified as a sexual predator].

          Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
          It is a defense to the crime of Failure to Register as a Sexual Predator that (defendant) attempted to register as required by law but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from timely registering by the Department of Corrections.

          There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
          The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

          If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
          If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Department of Corrections misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Department of Corrections misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

          Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
          If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the Department of Corrections did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the Department of Corrections misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

          Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
          Lesser Included Offenses

          No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

          Comment

          This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and 2014.

          11.15(a) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEXUAL PREDATOR
          (Initially Register – Not in Custody, Control or under Supervision of the Department of Corrections or a Private Correctional Facility)
          § 775.21(6)(e), Fla. Stat.

          To prove the crime of Failure to Register as a Sexual Predator, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

              Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                1. (Defendant)
                    a. is a sexual predator.
                    b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
                3. (Defendant) was not in the custody or control of or under the supervision of the Department of Corrections and was not in the custody of a private correctional facility.
          Give 4a or 4b or 4a and 4b, as appropriate.
              4(a). (Defendant) knowingly failed to register in person with an office of the sheriff in the county where [he] [she] [established] [maintained] residence within 48 hours after [he] [she] established permanent, temporary, or transient residence in this state.
              4(b). (Defendant) knowingly failed to register in person with an office of the sheriff in the county where [he] [she] was designated a sexual predator within 48 hours after having been so designated by the court.
          Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
          It is a defense to the crime of Failure to Register as a Sexual Predator that (defendant) attempted to register as required by law but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from timely registering by the office of the sheriff.

          There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
          The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

          If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
          If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

          Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
          If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from registering, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

              Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
          Lesser Included Offenses

          No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
          Comment

          This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

          11.15(b) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS (Failure to Comply with Registration RequirementsProvide Required Information)
          § 775.21(6)(a)1, Fla. Stat.

          To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

          Give 1a or 1b as applicable.

                1. (Defendant)
                    a. is a sexual predator.
                    b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”

                2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.


                3. (Defendant) knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with [his] [her] [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: [his] [her] (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)].
            Read only if the defendant is charged with failing to provide a physical residential address.
            The defendant shall provide a physical residential address. A post office box shall not be provided in lieu of a physical residential address.
            Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
            It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

            There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
            The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

            If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
            If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

            Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
            If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

            Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
            Lesser Included Offenses

            No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
            Comment

            This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 2d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 3d 754], and 2014.
            11.15(c) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
            (Failure to Comply with Registration of a Residence, Motor Vehicle, Trailer, Mobile Home, or Manufactured Home)
            §775.21(6)(a)1.a., Fla. Stat.

            To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

            Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                  1. (Defendant)
                      a. is a sexual predator.
                      b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                  2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

            Give 3a or 3b as applicable.
                  3. (Defendant)
                      a. used as [his] [her] place of residence a [motor vehicle] [trailer] [mobile home] [manufactured home];

                    and

                    knowingly failed to provide [an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County] [the Florida Department of Law Enforcement] with [the (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)]of the [motor vehicle] [trailer] [mobile home] [manufactured home] where [he] [she] resides.
                      b. used as [his] [her] place of residence a [vessel] [live-aboard vessel] [houseboat];

                    and

                    knowingly failed to provide [an office of the sheriff of (name of the county) County] [the Florida Department of Law Enforcement] with [the (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)][any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)] of the [vessel][live-aboard vessel][houseboat] where [he][she] resides.

            Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
            It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

            There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
            The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.



            If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
            If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

            Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
            If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

            Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
              Lesser Included Offenses

              No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
              Comment

              This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 2d 754], and 2014.

              11.15(d) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
              (Failure to Comply with Registration of Enrollment or
              Employment in Institutions of Higher Education)
              § 775.21(6)(a)1.b., Fla. Stat.

              To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

              Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                    1. (Defendant)
                        a. is a sexual predator.
                        b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                    2. (Defendant) [established] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

              Give 3a, 3b, or 3c as applicable.
                    3. (Defendant)
                        a. [is] [was] enrolled, employed, or carrying on a vocation at an institution of higher education in this state, and

                      knowingly failed to provide the office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with the [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)].
                        b. [is] [was] enrolled, employed, or carrying on a vocation at an institution of higher education in this state;

                      undertook a change in [his] [her] enrollment or employment status, and

                      knowingly failed to report this change in person at an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County within 48 hours after the change.
                        c. [is] [was] in the custody of or under the supervision of the Department of Corrections;

                      [is] [was] enrolled, employed, or carrying on a vocation at an institution of higher education in this state;

                      undertook a change in [his] [her] enrollment or employment status, and

                      knowingly failed to report this change to the Department of Corrections within 48 hours after the change.

              Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
              It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the [office of the sheriff][Department of Corrections].

              There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
              The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

              If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
              If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff][Department of Corrections] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff][Department of Corrections] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

              Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
              If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [office of the sheriff][Department of Corrections]did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty.

              Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
              Lesser Included Offenses

              No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
              Comment

              This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

              11.15(e) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
              (Failure to Report to Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles)
              § 775.21(6)(f), Fla. Stat.

              To prove the crime of Failure Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

              Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                    1. (Defendant)
                        a. is a sexual predator.
                        b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                    2. (Defendant) [established] [maintained] a [permanent] [temporary] [transient] residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

              Give 3a or 3b as applicable.
                    3. (Defendant)
                        a. was not incarcerated;
                          [he] [she] resided in the community and was [under the supervision] [not under the supervision] of the Department of Corrections;

                      [he] [she] registered as a sexual predator with an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County; and
                      knowingly failed to report in person at a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles within 48 hours after registering to present proof of this registration.
                          b. reported in person to a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, and either

                            knowingly failed to [secure a Florida driver’s license] [renew a Florida driver’s license] [secure an identification card] or

                            secured a Florida driver’s license] [renewed [his] [her] Florida driver’s license] [secured a Florida identification card], but in doing so,


                        Give one or both of the following as applicable to the charge.
                            i. failed to report to that office that [he] [she] was a sexual predator.
                            ii. failed to provide that office with [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)].

                Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply withn the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.

                There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

                Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                Lesser Included Offenses

                No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

                Comment

                This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.
                11.15(f) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
                (Failure to Provide Other Necessary Information Requested by Department of Law Enforcement)
                § 775.21(6)(a)2, Fla. Stat.

                To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

                Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                      1. (Defendant)
                          a. is a sexual predator.
                          b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                      2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
                      3. (Defendant) knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with [his] [her] [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items determined necessary by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement: [his] [her] (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)].

                Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

                There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him][her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty.

                Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                Lesser Included Offenses

                No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
                Comment

                This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

                11.15(g) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
                (Failure to Report Change of Name or Address within the State or Jurisdiction)
                § 775.21(6)(g), Fla. Stat.

                To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

                Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                      1. (Defendant)
                          a. is a sexual predator.
                          b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                      2. (Defendant) [established] [maintained] a [permanent] [temporary] [transient] residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
                Give 3a, 3b, or 3c as applicable.
                      3. (Defendant)
                          a. knowingly failed to report in person to a driver’s license office [when [his] [her] driver’s license or identification card was subject to renewal] [within 48 hours after any change in [his] [her] permanent, temporary, or transient residence] [within 48 hours after any change in [his] [her] name by reason of [marriage] [(specify other legal process)]].
                          b. knowingly failed to report in person to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County within 48 hours of vacating [his] [her] permanent, temporary, or transient residence and failing to establish or maintain another permanent, temporary, or transient residence.
                          c. knowingly failed to report in person to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County that [he] [she] did not vacate [his] [her] permanent, temporary, or transient residence within 48 hours after (defendant) reported to that agency [his] [her] intent to vacate [his] [her] permanent, temporary, or transient residence.
                          d. reported to
                            Give i or ii as applicable.
                            i. an office of the sheriff of (name of county)

                            ii. a driver’s license office of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

                and

                Give iii or iv as applicable.
                            iii. knowingly failed to provide that office with (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute).

                            iv. knowingly failed to provide that office with any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).

                Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the [office of the sheriff][Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles].

                There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff][Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff][Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him][her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [office of the sheriff][Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] did not misinform (defendant) or otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the [office of the sheriff][Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles] misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty.

                Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                Lesser Included Offenses

                No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
                Comment

                This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

                11.15(h) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
                (Failure to Respond To Address Verification Correspondence)
                § 775.21(10)(a), Fla. Stat.

                To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

                Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                      1. (Defendant)
                          a. is a sexual predator.
                          b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 predator” or “convicted.”
                      2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
                      3. (Defendant) knowingly failed to respond to address verification correspondence from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement within three weeks from the date of the correspondence.

                Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

                There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, as worded in the statute)], you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the Florida Department of Law Enforcement misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

                Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                Lesser Included Offenses

                No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

                Comment

                This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d1090] and 2014.

                11.15(i) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
                (Failure to Report Intent to Move to Another State or Jurisdiction)
                § 775.21(6)(i), Fla. Stat.

                To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

                Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                      1. (Defendant)
                          a. is a sexual predator.
                          b. has agreed or stipulated that he has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 also give the definition of “sexual predator” or “convicted.”
                      2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
                Give 3a or 3b as applicable.
                      3. (Defendant)


                          a. intended to leave this State to establish a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in another state or jurisdiction on (date);

                            and

                            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.


                          b. (Defendant)
                        reported to an office of the sheriff of the county of [his] [her] current residence [his] [her] intention to establish residence in another state or jurisdiction;
                            and

                        knowingly failed to provide [[his] [her] (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: [his] [her] (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).]
                Read only if the defendant is charged with failing to provide a physical residential address.
                The defendant shall provide a physical residential address. A post office box shall not be provided in lieu of a physical residential address.

                Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

                There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

                Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                Lesser Included Offenses

                No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
                Comment

                This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 3d 754] and 2014.

                11.15(j) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
                (Failure to Report Intent to Remain within the State or Jurisdiction)
                § 775.21(6)(j), Fla. Stat.

                To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following five elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

                Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                      1. (Defendant)
                          a. is a sexual predator.
                          b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 also give the definition of “sexual predator” or “convicted.”
                      2. (Defendant) established or maintained a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
                      3. (Defendant) indicated to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County [his] [her] intent to leave this state on (date of intended departure) and establish a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in another state or jurisdiction.
                      4. (Defendant) later decided to remain in this state.
                      5. Within 48 hours after the date of [his] [her] originally intended departure from this state, (defendant) knowingly failed to report to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County that [he] [she] instead decided to remain in this state.
                Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                It is a defense to the crime of Failure to Comply with Registration Requirements as a Sexual Predator that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

                There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

                Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                Lesser Included Offenses

                No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
                Comment

                This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So.2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090] and 2014.

                11.15(k) FAILURE TO REGISTER AS BY A SEXUAL PREDATOR TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
                (Failure to Register Quarterly)
                § 775.21(8)(a), Fla. Stat.

                To prove the crime of Failure to Register as by a Sexual Predator to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

                Give 1a or 1b as applicable.
                      1. (Defendant)
                          a. is a sexual predator.
                            b. has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual predator; therefore, you should consider the sexual predator 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 also give the definition of “sexual predator” or “convicted.”
                        2. (Defendant) [established] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.

                  Give 3a, 3b, or 3c as applicable.
                        3. (Defendant)
                            a. knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during [his] [her] birthday month in (year) to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
                            b. knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during every third month following [his] [her] (year) birthday month to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
                            c. knowingly failed to provide an office of the sheriff of (name of county) County with a change to [his] [her] [(name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute)] [any one or more of the following items: [his] [her] (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute)].
                  Read only if the defendant is charged with failing to provide a physical residential address.
                  The defendant shall provide a physical residential address. A post office box shall not be provided in lieu of a physical residential address.
                    Give if applicable. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
                    It is a defense to the crime of Failure to Comply with Registration Requirements as a Sexual Predator that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.

                    There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
                    The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction. See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.

                    If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
                    If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the office of the sheriff misinformed [him][her] or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                    Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
                    If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the office of the sheriff did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him][her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the office of the sheriff misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him][her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.

                    Definitions. See instruction 11.15(l) for the applicable definitions.
                    Lesser Included Offenses

                    No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.

                    Comment

                    This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and revised in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 3d 754] and 2014.

                    [Revised: 09-02-2014]