Florida expands criminal penalties for threats against court officials
Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka
Florida’s longest-serving magistrate says she’s grateful now that the Legislature has agreed to enhance criminal penalties for threatening and harassing a wider range of “court officials.”
“I’m very grateful for the bill sponsors, I’m very grateful for the Family Law Section, and I really hope that the governor signs it,” said 15th Judicial Circuit Magistrate Diane Kirigin. “This is going to be very, very helpful, not just to us, but also our assistants.”
Kirigin spoke in a phone interview a few hours before the House voted 113-0 Wednesday to sign off on HB 1049 by Republican Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka, a Ft. Myers attorney. Sen. Jonathan Martin, a Ft. Myers attorney and former prosecutor, is the Senate sponsor.
The bill includes a Family Law Section provision that expands the definition of “court official” to include general magistrates, special magistrates, child support enforcement hearing officers, and their administrative assistants.
Just before the vote, Persons-Mulicka added an amendment that addresses concerns raised by the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
“Thank you, Mr. Speaker,” Persons-Mulicka said. “Members, the amendment clarifies that the prohibitions in the bill to do not apply to actions of an attorney acting in the performance of his or her duties.”
Tallahassee attorney Aaron Wayt warned a Senate panel that the bill’s prohibitions against “intimidation,” “threats,” and “misleading conduct” could unintentionally expose attorneys to criminal charges.
An experienced defense attorney making a “zealous” defense could be misunderstood by a beginning prosecutor, Wayt said.
“Sometimes that can feel intimidating to that prosecutor, the tactics or the words used by that defense attorney,” he said.
A provision of HB 1049 adds general and special magistrates, child support enforcement hearing officers, and their administrative assistants to a law that makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to “knowingly and willfully” threaten police, prosecutors, firefighters, judges, justices, judicial assistants, clerks of court, court clerk personnel, elected officials, and their respective family members, “with death or serious bodily harm.”
“Importantly, this acknowledges the essential functions these individuals perform in the judicial process and grants them equal protection under the law,” Family Law Section Chair Chris Rumbold said in a statement after the bill cleared a final Senate committee a week ago.
The bill creates new criminal offenses and amends several existing statutes relating to tampering with, harassing, or retaliating against court officials, “and provides graduated penalties, depending on the offense level of the official investigation or proceeding affected,” notes a staff analysis.
Depending on the affected investigation or proceeding, the penalties range from a misdemeanor to a capitol felony.
“By establishing clear legal boundaries and consequences, the Legislature is reinforcing the principle that any action to obstruct or threaten a court official will be met with appropriate repercussions,” Rumbold said.
The Family Law Section launched the initiative last year in response to increasing reports that various quasi-judicial officers were receiving threats or being harassed or intimidated.
Phil Wartenberg, a 13th Circuit magistrate, told a Senate committee that police were forced to awaken an Orlando hearing officer at 3 a.m. to warn her about threats investigators discovered on the dark web.
Kirigin said another hearing officer received threats from a disgruntled defendant who could identify her children’s daycare, and who knew where her husband worked.
“She had to spend lots of money scrubbing her social media sites,” Kirigin said.
The Family Law Section last year issued a white paper that recommended new legislation, noting that the Legislature in recent years enhanced protections for county and city attorneys, judicial assistants, court clerks, and court clerk personnel.
“The goal of the section’s proposed legislation is to remedy what can only be perceived as an oversight,” the white paper stated.
Magistrates often conduct hearings in hospitals and other venues that lack court security, the white paper noted.
Unlike judges, magistrates don’t rotate in and out of different court divisions, Kirigin said. A magistrate since 1995 and a former Family Law Section chair, Kirigin has presided over more than one generation of litigants.
“If you live in a small community, everybody knows each other, so the risk increases,” she said. “I was at a fair getting a hotdog, and someone said, ‘Magistrate Kirigin!’ and I froze.”
Kirigin urged lawmakers to consider enhancing protections for administrative law judges and judges of compensation claims who work under the state’s Division of Administrative Hearings.
“I’d like to think that when the Legislature looks at any legislation involving security to judicial officers, or quasi-judicial officers, that they also look at our brethren on the executive branch side, because they have just as much risk.”
