In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases – Report 2019-03

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC19-470 ____________ IN RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES— REPORT 2019-03. February 6, 2020 PER CURIAM. The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (Committee) has submitted proposed changes to the standard jury instructions and asks that the Court authorize the amended standard instructions. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. The Committee filed a report proposing amendments to existing standard criminal jury instruction 25.13(f) ([Ownership] [Lease] [Rental] of a Place for [[Trafficking in] [Sale of] a Controlled Substance] [Manufacturing a Controlled Substance Intended for Sale or Distribution]), and new standard criminal jury instructions 25.13(g) (Possession of a Place for [[Trafficking in] [Sale of] a Controlled Substance] [Manufacturing a Controlled Substance Intended for Sale or Distribution]) and 25.13(h) (Possession of a Place Used to Manufacture a Controlled Substance Intended for Sale or Distribution (Minor Present or in Residence)). Previously, the Committee published the proposals in The Florida Bar News; no comments were received by the Committee. We authorize for publication and use instruction 25.13(f) as amended by the Committee, and new instructions 25.13(g) and 25.13(h) with the modification discussed below. New instructions 25.13(g) and 25.13(h) instruct upon the offenses codified in section 893.1351, subsections (1) and (2), Florida Statutes (2019), respectively, track the statutory language, and include relevant definitions. We modify the Committee’s proposal to include the term “trailer” within the applicable elemental and definitional portions of the instructions. The instructional language included in each pertaining to “possession” is consistent with that previously authorized. See In re Std. Jury Instrs. in Criminal Cases—Report 2017-03, 238 So. 3d 182, 183 (Fla. 2018). In addition to the elements and the definition portions of the instructions, instruction 25.13(g) includes a comment reflecting that a special instruction may be required to address the nexus between the “conveyance,” “place,” “trailer,” or “structure,” and the drug activity, citing Hunt v. State, 256 So. 3d 243 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018), and Delgado-George v. State, 125 So. 3d 1031 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013), and both instructions include a comment that a special instruction will be required if the defense is that the defendant did not know of the illicit nature of the controlled substance, citing section 893.101, Florida Statutes. -2- Having considered the Committee’s report, we authorize for publication and use existing instruction 25.13(f) as proposed and new instructions 25.13(g) and 25.13(h) as modified, and as set forth in the appendix to this opinion. 1 New language is indicated by underlining. In authorizing the publication and use of these instructions, we express no opinion on their correctness and remind all interested parties that this authorization forecloses neither requesting additional or alternative instructions nor contesting the legal correctness of the instructions. We further caution all interested parties that any comments associated with the instructions reflect only the opinion of the Committee and are not necessarily indicative of the views of this Court as to their correctness or applicability. The instructions as set forth in the appendix …Original document