In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases – Report No. 2015-07 , 192 So. 3d 1190 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •           Supreme Court of Florida
    ____________
    No. SC15-1867
    ____________
    IN RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES—
    REPORT NO. 2015-07.
    [May 12, 2016]
    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 proposes amending the following existing standard criminal
    jury instructions: 28.1 (Driving Under the Influence); 28.1(a) (Driving Under the
    Influence Causing Property Damage or Injury); 28.2 (Felony Driving Under the
    Influence); 28.3 (Driving Under the Influence Causing Serious Bodily Injury); 28.4
    (Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving [Death] [Serious Bodily Injury] [Injury]);
    28.8(b) (Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding – Leaving a Crash Involving Serious
    Bodily Injury, Injury or Death then Causing Serious Bodily Injury or Death);
    28.8(c) (Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding – Leaving a Crash Involving Damage to a
    Vehicle or Property then Causing Serious Bodily Injury or Death); 28.8(d)
    (Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding – Leaving a Crash Involving Serious Bodily
    Injury, Injury or Death then Causing Injury or Property Damage to Another);
    28.8(e) (Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding – Leaving a Crash Involving Damage to a
    Vehicle or Property then Causing Injury or Property Damage to Another); 28.14
    (Boating Under the Influence); 28.15 (Boating Under the Influence Causing
    Property Damage or Injury); 28.16 (Felony Boating Under the Influence); and
    28.17 (Boating Under the Influence Causing Serious Bodily Injury). The
    Committee also proposes the following new jury instruction: 28.4(b) (Leaving the
    Scene of a Crash Involving Damage to an Unattended Vehicle or Unattended
    Property).
    Before filing its report with the Court, the Committee published its proposals
    for comment in The Florida Bar News. Three comments were received by the
    Committee: one from the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
    (FACDL) pertaining to instruction 28.4(b); and one each from the Florida Public
    Defender Association, Inc. (FPDA) and Public Defender Blaise Trettis, both
    pertaining to the Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Boating Under the
    Influence (BUI) instructions. The Committee made some changes to its proposals
    upon consideration of the three comments. With respect to the DUI and BUI
    -2-
    instructions, the Committee clarified the definition of “impaired.” With respect to
    instruction 28.4(b), the Committee added a comment to the instruction addressing
    the issue of mens rea. Because the Court did not view these changes as significant,
    the Court did not publish the Committee’s proposals for further comment.
    Having considered the Committee’s report and the comments received by
    the Committee, we amend the standard jury instructions as proposed by the
    Committee and authorize them for publication and use. We also authorize new
    instruction 28.4(b), as proposed by the Committee, for publication and use. In so
    doing, we note with respect to instruction 28.4(b) that the issue raised by FACDL,
    that the misdemeanor hit-and-run statute underlying proposed instruction 28.4(b)
    imposes an affirmative duty on a driver to take certain actions, and therefore
    knowledge of involvement in an accident is implied, has not been expressly
    addressed by any court. Accordingly, we decline to use the instant proceedings
    authorizing the publication and use of standard jury instructions as the basis for
    addressing such an issue. Such matters are appropriate for consideration by this
    Court only within the context of an actual case or controversy. See art. V, § 3(b),
    Fla. Const; In re Std. Jury Instr. in Crim. Cases—Report No. 2015-05, 
    41 Fla. L
    .
    Weekly S140 (Fla. Apr. 7, 2016).
    -3-
    The new and amended criminal jury instructions, as set forth in the appendix
    to this opinion, are hereby authorized for publication and use.1 New language is
    indicated by underlining, and deleted language is indicated by struck-through type.
    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 shall be
    effective when this opinion becomes final.
    It is so ordered.
    LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON,
    and PERRY, JJ., concur.
    NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND
    IF FILED, DETERMINED.
    1. The amendments as reflected in the appendix are to the Criminal Jury
    Instructions as they appear on the Court’s website at www.floridasupremecourt.org
    /jury_instructions/instructions.shtml. We recognize that there may be minor
    discrepancies between the instructions as they appear on the website and the
    published versions of the instructions. Any discrepancies as to instructions
    authorized for publication and use after October 25, 2007, should be resolved by
    reference to the published opinion of this Court authorizing the instruction.
    -4-
    Original Proceeding – Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in
    Criminal Cases
    Judge Frederic Rand Wallis, Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury
    Instructions in Criminal Cases, Daytona Beach, Florida; Judge Jerri Lynn Collins,
    Past Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal
    Cases, Sanford, Florida; and Barton Neil Schneider, Staff Liaison, Office of the
    State Courts Administrator, Tallahassee, Florida,
    for Petitioner
    -5-
    APPENDIX
    28.1 DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
    § 316.193(1), Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Driving under the Influence, the State must prove
    the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) drove [or was in actual physical control of] a
    vehicle.
    2.    While driving [or in actual physical control of] the vehicle,
    (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.    had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    Give if applicable. § 316.193(4), Fla. Stat. (Offenses committed prior to
    October 1, 2008, alcohol level of .20 or higher.)
    If you find the defendant guilty of Driving under the Influence, you
    must also determine whether the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt
    whether:
    a.    the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    .15 or higher while driving [or in actual physical
    control of] the vehicle.
    b.    the defendant was accompanied in the vehicle by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    dDriving under the iInfluence.
    -6-
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    Vehicle is every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is,
    or may be, transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used
    exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat.
    Normal faculties include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, drive an automobile, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    Give if applicable.
    The option of “on a vehicle” pertains to vehicles such as motorcycles and
    bicycles.
    Actual physical control of a vehicle means the defendant must be
    physically in [or on] the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle,
    regardless of whether [he] [she] is actually operating the vehicle at the time.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    Alcoholic beverages are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (             ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (             ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    When appropriate, give one or of the following instructions on the
    presumptions of impairment established by Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.      If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    -7-
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with driving with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant drove with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level, impairment
    becomes moot. Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Driving under the Influence if at the time
    of the alleged offense, the vehicle was inoperable. However, it is not a defense
    if the defendant was driving under the influence before the vehicle became
    inoperable. Therefore, if you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt
    that the vehicle was operable at the time of the alleged offense, you should find
    the defendant not guilty. However, if you are convinced that the vehicle was
    -8-
    operable at the time of the alleged offense, then you should find the defendant
    guilty, if all the other elements of the charge have been proved beyond a
    reasonable doubt.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE — 316.193(1)
    CATEGORY ONE            CATEGORY TWO             FLA. STAT.       INS. NO.
    None
    Attempt                  777.04(1)        5.1
    Comment
    A misdemeanor instruction was adopted in 1981 as part of Standard Jury
    Instructions In Misdemeanor Cases. In 1992, a similar instruction was adopted for
    Florida Standard Jury Instructions In Criminal Cases. That instruction was
    amended in 1995 and 1998; both instructions were merged into a revised
    instruction in 2000, which was amended in 2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ] and 2016.
    28.1(a) DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING
    PROPERTY DAMAGE OR INJURY
    § 316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)1, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Driving under the Influence Causing [Property
    Damage] [Injury], the State must prove the following three elements beyond a
    reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) drove [or was in actual physical control of[ a
    vehicle.
    2.    While driving [or in actual physical control of] the vehicle,
    (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.     had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    -9-
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    3.    As a result of operating the vehicle, (defendant) caused or
    contributed to causing [damage to the property of (victim)]
    [injury to the person of (victim)].
    Give if applicable. § 316.193(4), Fla. Stat. (Offenses committed prior to
    October 1, 2008, alcohol level of .20 or higher.)
    If you find the defendant guilty of Driving under the Influence Causing
    [Property Damage] [Injury], you must also determine whether the State has
    proven beyond a reasonable doubt whether:
    a.    the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    .15 or higher while driving [or in actual physical
    control of] the vehicle.
    b.    the defendant was accompanied in the vehicle by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    dDriving under the iInfluence.
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    Vehicle is every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is,
    or may be, transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used
    exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat.
    Normal faculties include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, drive an automobile, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    - 10 -
    Give if applicable.
    The option of “on a vehicle” pertains to vehicles such as motorcycles and
    bicycles.
    Actual physical control of a vehicle means the defendant must be
    physically in [or on] the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle,
    regardless of whether [he] [she] is actually operating the vehicle at the time.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    Alcoholic beverages are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (             ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (             ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    When appropriate, give one or of the following instructions on the
    presumptions of impairment established by Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.      If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.      If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    - 11 -
    3.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with driving with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant drove with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level, impairment
    becomes moot.; Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Driving under the Influence Causing
    [Property Damage] [Injury] if at the time of the alleged offense, the vehicle
    was inoperable. However, it is not a defense if the defendant was driving
    under the influence before the vehicle became inoperable. Therefore, if you
    are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the vehicle was operable at
    the time of the alleged offense, you should find the defendant not guilty.
    However, if you are convinced that the vehicle was operable at the time of the
    alleged offense, then you should find the defendant guilty, if all the other
    elements of the charge have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING PROPERTY
    DAMAGE OR INJURY — - 316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)1.
    CATEGORY ONE    CATEGORY TWO      FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
    DUI                               316.193(1)       28.1
    Attempt           777.04(1)        5.1
    - 12 -
    Comment
    This instruction was adopted in 2009, In re Standard Jury Instructions in
    Criminal Cases-Report No. 2008-08, [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ] (Fla. 2009), and amended in
    2009 [
    18 So. 3d 523
    ], and 2016.
    28.2 FELONY DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
    § 316.193(2)(b)1 or § 316.193(2)(b)3, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Driving under the Influence, the State must prove
    the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) drove [or was in actual physical control of] a
    vehicle.
    2.    While driving [or in actual physical control of] the vehicle,
    (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.    had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    Give if applicable. § 316.193(4), Fla. Stat. (Offenses committed prior to
    October 1, 2008, alcohol level of .20 or higher.)
    If you find the defendant guilty of Driving under the Influence, you
    must also determine whether the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt
    whether:
    a.    the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    .15 or higher while driving [or in actual physical
    control of] the vehicle.
    b.    the defendant was accompanied in the vehicle by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    dDriving under the iInfluence.
    - 13 -
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    Vehicle is every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is,
    or may be, transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used
    exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat.
    Normal faculties include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, drive an automobile, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    Give if applicable.
    The option of “on a vehicle” pertains to vehicles such as motorcycles and
    bicycles.
    Actual physical control of a vehicle means the defendant must be
    physically in [or on] the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle,
    regardless of whether [he] [she] is actually operating the vehicle at the time.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    Alcoholic beverages are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (             ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (             ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    When appropriate, give one or of the following instructions on the
    presumptions of impairment established by Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.      If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    - 14 -
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with driving with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant drove with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level, impairment
    becomes moot. Robertson v. State, 
    604 So. 2d 783
    , 792, n.14 (Fla. 1992); Tyner v.
    State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Driving under the Influence if at the time
    of the alleged offense, the vehicle was inoperable. However, it is not a defense
    if the defendant was driving under the influence before the vehicle became
    inoperable. Therefore, if you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt
    that the vehicle was operable at the time of the alleged offense, you should find
    - 15 -
    the defendant not guilty. However, if you are convinced that the vehicle was
    operable at the time of the alleged offense, then you should find the defendant
    guilty, if all the other elements of the charge have been proved beyond a
    reasonable doubt.
    Give as applicable if the jury finds the defendant guilty of Driving under the
    Influence. Note: BUI and out-of-state DUI/DWI convictions count as prior
    convictions. See §316.193(6)(k), Fla. Stat. See State v. Harbaugh, 
    754 So. 2d 691
    (Fla. 2000).
    Now that you have found the defendant guilty of Driving under the
    Influence, you must further determine whether the State has proven beyond a
    reasonable doubt whether:
    a.    the defendant was previously convicted two times of
    Driving under the Influence and one of the prior
    Driving Under the Influence convictions took place
    within 10 years of the Driving Under the Influence
    that you found the defendant committed.
    b.    the defendant was previously convicted three times of
    Driving under the Influence.
    Give if applicable. 316.193(12), Fla. Stat.
    If the records of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
    show that the defendant has been previously convicted of Driving under the
    Influence, you may conclude that the State has established that prior Driving
    under the Influence conviction. However, such evidence may be contradicted
    or rebutted by other evidence. Accordingly, this inference may be considered
    along with any other evidence in deciding whether the defendant has a prior
    Driving under the Influence conviction.
    - 16 -
    Lesser Included Offenses
    FELONY DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE – [THIRD OFFENSE
    WITHIN 10 YEARS OF A PRIOR CONVICTION] [FOURTH
    OFFENSE] — 316.193(2)(b)1. or 316.193(2)(b)3.
    CATEGORY         CATEGORY         FLA. STAT.           INS. NO.
    ONE              TWO
    Driving under                     316.193(1)           28.1
    the influence
    Attempt          777.04(1)            5.1
    Driving under    316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)1 28.1(a)
    the influence
    causing property
    damage or injury
    Comments
    This instruction should be used for Felony Driving under the Influence based
    on prior convictions. For Felony Driving under the Influence based on prior
    convictions, it is error to inform the jury of prior Driving under the
    Influence/Boating under the Influence convictions until the verdict on the
    underlying Driving under the Influence is rendered. Therefore, if the information
    or indictment contains an allegation of prior Driving under the Influence/Boating
    under the Influence convictions, do not read that allegation and do not send the
    information or indictment into the jury room. If the defendant is found guilty of
    Driving under the Influence, the historical fact of prior convictions shall be
    determined separately by the jury in a bifurcated proceeding. See State v.
    Harbaugh, 
    754 So. 2d 691
    (Fla. 2000).
    This instruction was adopted in 2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ] and amended in 2016.
    28.3 DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING
    SERIOUS BODILY INJURY
    § 316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)2., Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Driving under the Influence Causing Serious
    Bodily Injury, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a
    reasonable doubt:
    - 17 -
    1.    (Defendant) drove [or was in actual physical control of] a
    vehicle.
    2.    While driving [or in actual physical control of] the vehicle,
    (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.    had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    3.    As a result of operating the vehicle, (defendant) caused or
    contributed to causing serious bodily injury to (victim).
    Give if applicable. § 316.193(4), Fla. Stat. (Offenses committed prior to
    October 1, 2008, alcohol level of .20 or higher.)
    If you find the defendant guilty of Driving under the Influence, you
    must also determine whether the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt
    whether:
    a.    the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    0.15 or higher while driving [or in actual physical
    control of] the vehicle.
    b.    the defendant was accompanied in the vehicle by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    dDriving under the iInfluence.
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    Vehicle is every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is,
    or may be, transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used
    exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.1934(1), Fla. Stat.
    Normal faculties include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, drive an automobile, make judgments, act in
    - 18 -
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    Give if applicable.
    The option of “on a vehicle” pertains to vehicles such as motorcycles and
    bicycles.
    Actual physical control of a vehicle means the defendant must be
    physically in [or on] the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle,
    regardless of whether [he] [she] is actually operating the vehicle at the time.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    Alcoholic beverages are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (             ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (             ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    § 316.1933, Fla. Stat.
    Serious bodily injury means a physical condition that creates a
    substantial risk of death, serious personal disfigurement, or protracted loss or
    impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.
    When appropriate, give one or of the following instructions on the
    presumptions of impairment established by Give if appropriate. § 316.1934(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.      If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    - 19 -
    2.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.     If you find from the evidence that while driving or in actual
    physical control of a motor vehicle, the defendant had a
    blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 316.1934(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with driving with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant drove with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level, impairment
    becomes moot. Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Driving under the Influence Causing
    Serious Bodily Injury if at the time of the alleged offense, the vehicle was
    inoperable. However, it is not a defense if the defendant was driving under the
    influence before the vehicle became inoperable. Therefore, if you are not
    convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the vehicle was operable at the time
    of the alleged offense, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if
    you are convinced that the vehicle was operable at the time of the alleged
    offense, then you should find the defendant guilty, if all the other elements of
    the charge have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
    - 20 -
    Lesser Included Offenses
    DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING SERIOUS BODILY
    INJURY—316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)2.
    CATEGORY ONE              CATEGORY      FLA. STAT.            INS. NO.
    TWO
    Driving under the                       316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)1. 28.1
    influence causing injury                                      28.1(a)
    Driving under the                       316.193(1)            28.1
    influence
    Driving under 316.193(3)(a)(b)(c)1. 28.1(a)
    the influence
    causing
    property
    damage
    Attempt       777.04(1)             5.1
    Comment
    This instruction was adopted in 1992 and amended in 1998 [
    723 So. 2d 123
    ],
    2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ], and 2013 [
    131 So. 3d 720
    ], and 2016.
    28.4 LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH INVOLVING
    [DEATH] [SERIOUS BODILY INJURY] [INJURY]
    § 316.027(12), Fla. Stat.; § 316.062, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving [Death]
    [Injury], the State must prove the following four elements beyond a
    reasonable doubt:
    1.     (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash or
    accident occurring on public or private property resulting
    in [injury to] [death of] any person.
    2.     (Defendant) knew that [he] [she] was involved in a crash or
    accident.
    Give 3a if death is charged or 3b if injury or serious bodily injury is
    charged.
    - 21 -
    3.     a.    (Defendant) knew, or should have known from all of
    the circumstances, including the nature of the crash
    or accident, of the injury to or death of the person.
    b.    (Defendant) knew, or should have known from all of
    the circumstances, including the nature of the crash
    or accident, of the injury to the person.
    Give 4a, 4b, or both as applicable.
    4.    a.     (Defendant) willfully failed to stop at the scene of the
    crash or accident or as close to the crash or accident
    as possible and remain there until [he] [she] had given
    “identifying information” to the [injured person]
    [driver] [occupant] [person attending the vehicle] and
    to any police officer investigating the crash or
    accident.
    [or]
    b.    (Defendant) willfully failed to render “reasonable
    assistance” to the injured person if such treatment
    appeared to be necessary or was requested by the
    injured person.
    If the State proves that the defendant willfully failed to give any part of
    the “identifying information” or willfully failed to give reasonable assistance,
    the State satisfies this element of the offense.
    Give if serious bodily injury is charged. § 316.027(1)(a), Fla. Stat.;
    § 316.027(2)(b), Fla. Stat.
    If you find that (defendant) committed the crime of Leaving the Scene of
    a Crash Involving Injury, you must then determine whether the State proved
    beyond a reasonable doubt that the injury was a serious bodily injury.
    “Serious bodily injury” means an injury to a person, including the
    driver, which consists of a physical condition that creates a substantial risk of
    death, serious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function
    of a bodily member or organ.
    Enhancement. Give when the State alleged the victim was a “vulnerable
    road user.” § 316.027(2)(f), Fla. Stat.
    - 22 -
    If you find that (defendant) committed the crime of Leaving the Scene
    of a Crash Involving [Death] [Serious Bodily Injury] [or] [Injury], you must
    then determine whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the
    [injured person] [person who died] was:
    [a pedestrian].
    [actually engaged in work upon a highway].
    [actually engaged in work upon utility facilities along a highway].
    [engaged in the provision of emergency services within the right-
    of-way].
    [operating a [bicycle] [motorcycle] [scooter] [moped] lawfully on
    the roadway].
    [riding an animal].
    [lawfully operating [a farm tractor or similar vehicle designed
    primarily for farm use] [a skateboard] [roller-skates] [in-line
    skates] [a horse-drawn carriage] [an electric personal assistive
    mobility device] [a wheelchair] on [a public right-of-way]
    [crosswalk] [shoulder of the roadway]].
    Definitions. Give as applicable. Fla. Stat. § 316.003(75). § 316.003(75),
    Fla. Stat.
    A “vehicle” is any device in, upon, or by which any person or property
    is, or may be, transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used
    exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.062, Fla. Stat.
    “Identifying information” means the name, address, vehicle registration
    number, and, if available and requested, the exhibition of the defendant’s
    license or permit to drive.
    “Reasonable assistance” includes carrying or making arrangements to
    carry the injured person to a physician or hospital for medical treatment.
    Patterson v. State, 
    512 So. 2d 1109
    (Fla. 1stst DCA 1987).
    “Willfully” means knowingly, intentionally and purposely.
    If the “vulnerable road user” enhancement is given, insert applicable
    definitions from § 316.003, Fla. Stat.
    - 23 -
    Lesser Included Offenses
    LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH INVOLVING DEATH
    OR INJURY — 316.027(12)(c)
    CATEGORY ONE           CATEGORY TWO       FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
    None Leaving the                          316.027(2)(b) 28.4
    Scene of a Crash
    Involving Serious
    Bodily Injury*
    Leaving the Scene of a                    316.027(2)(a) 28.4
    Crash Involving
    Injury*
    Attempt            777.04(1)     5.1
    LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH INVOLVING SERIOUS
    BODILY INJURY — 316.027(2)(b)
    CATEGORY ONE           CATEGORY TWO      FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
    Leaving the Scene of a                   316.027(2)(a) 28.4
    Crash Involving Injury
    Attempt           777.04(1)     5.1
    Comments
    * In Williams v. State, 
    732 So. 2d 431
    (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), the court stated
    in dictum that Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving Injury is a necessarily
    lesser-included offense of Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving Death. In other
    areas, however, where there is no issue that a person was killed as a result of an
    incident giving rise to criminal charges, non-death lessers are not appropriate. See,
    e.g., State v. Barritt, 
    531 So. 2d 338
    (Fla. 1988); Humphrey v. State, 
    690 So. 2d 1351
    (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
    See Mancuso v. State, 
    652 So. 2d 370
    (Fla. 1995), State v. Dumas, 
    700 So. 2d
    1223 (Fla. 1997), and State v. Dorsett, 
    158 So. 3d 557
    (Fla. 2015).
    This instruction was adopted in 1995 [
    665 So. 2d 212
    ] and amended in 2008
    [
    973 So. 2d 432
    ], and 2015 [
    166 So. 3d 131
    ], and 2016.
    - 24 -
    28.4(b) LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH INVOLVING DAMAGE TO
    AN UNATTENDED VEHICLE OR UNATTENDED PROPERTY
    § 316.063(1), Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving Damage
    to an Unattended Vehicle or Unattended Property, the State must prove the
    following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash or
    collision.
    2.    The crash or collision resulted in damage to another vehicle
    or other property.
    3.    The vehicle or other property was not driven or attended by
    any person.
    4.    (Defendant) failed to immediately stop at the scene of the
    crash or collision and then and there either
    a.    locate and notify the operator or owner of the vehicle
    or other property of [his] [her] name and address and
    the registration number of the vehicle [he] [she] was
    driving, or
    b.    attach securely in a conspicuous place in or on the
    vehicle or other property a written notice giving [his]
    [her] name and address and the registration number
    of the vehicle [he] [she] was driving, and, without
    unnecessary delay, notify the nearest office of a duly
    authorized police authority.
    § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    “Vehicle” means every device, in, upon, or by which any person or
    property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, excepting
    devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    - 25 -
    Lesser Included Offense
    LEAVING THE SCENE OF A CRASH INVOLVING DAMAGE TO
    AN UNATTENDED VEHICLE OR UNATTENDED PROPERTY—
    316.063(1)
    CATEGORY ONE    CATEGORY TWO      FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
    None
    Attempt           777.04(1)  5.1
    Comments
    As of September 2015, there was no case law directly addressing the issue of
    whether the State must prove the defendant knew, or should have known, of either
    the crash or the property damage to violate this statute. Compare State v. Dorsett,
    
    158 So. 3d 557
    (Fla. 2015) and Mancuso v. State, 
    652 So. 2d 370
    (Fla. 1995)
    dealing with § 316.027, Fla. Stat., which, unlike § 316.063, Fla. Stat., contains an
    explicit willfulness requirement.
    This instruction was adopted in 2016.
    28.8(b) AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Serious Bodily Injury, Injury or Death then
    Causing Serious Bodily Injury or Death)
    § 316.1935(4)(b) and § 316.027, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding, the State must
    prove the following seven elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash or
    accident occurring on public or private property resulting
    in [serious bodily injury to] [injury to] [the death of] any
    person.
    2.    (Defendant) knew that [he] [she] was involved in a crash or
    accident.
    - 26 -
    Give 3a if death is charged or 3b if injury or serious bodily injury is
    charged.
    3.    a.     (Defendant) knew, or should have known from all of
    the circumstances, including the nature of the crash
    or accident, of the injury to or death of the person.
    b.     (Defendant) knew, or should have known from all of
    the circumstances, including the nature of the crash
    or accident, of the injury to the person.
    Give 4a or 4b or both as applicable.
    4.    (Defendant)
    a.     willfully failed to stop at the scene of the crash or
    accident or as close to the crash or accident as
    possible and remain there until [he] [she] had given
    “identifying information” to the [injured person]
    [driver] [occupant][person attending the vehicle or
    other damaged property] and to any police officer
    investigating the crash or accident.
    [or]
    b.     willfully failed to render “reasonable assistance” to
    the injured person if such treatment appeared to be
    necessary or was requested by the injured person.
    5.     A duly authorized law enforcement officer ordered
    (defendant) to stop.
    6.     (Defendant), knowing [he][she] had been ordered to stop by
    a law enforcement officer, [willfully refused or failed to stop
    [his][her]vehicle in compliance with the order to stop] [and
    after having stopped in knowing compliance with the order
    to stop, willfully fled in a vehicle in an attempt to elude the
    law enforcement officer.]
    7.     As a result of (defendant) fleeing or eluding, [he] [she]
    caused [serious bodily injury to] [the death of] (name of
    victim).
    - 27 -
    § 316.027, Fla. Stat.
    A driver has the legal duty to immediately stop [his] [her] vehicle at the
    scene of the crash or accident or as close to the scene of the crash or accident
    as possible and provide “identifying information.”
    If the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
    willfully failed to give any part of the “identifying information” or willfully
    failed to give reasonable assistance, the State satisfies this element of the
    offense.
    Enhancement. Give when the State alleged the victim was a “vulnerable
    road user.” § 316.027(2)(f), Fla. Stat.
    If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that
    (defendant) committed elements #1 – #4, you must then determine whether the
    State also proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [injured person] [person
    who died] in element #1 was:
    [a pedestrian].
    [actually engaged in work upon a highway].
    [actually engaged in work upon utility facilities along a highway].
    [engaged in the provision of emergency services within the right-
    of-way].
    [operating a [bicycle] [motorcycle] [scooter] [moped] lawfully on
    the roadway].
    [riding an animal].
    [lawfully operating [a farm tractor or similar vehicle designed
    primarily for farm use] [a skateboard] [roller-skates] [in-line skates] [a
    horse-drawn carriage] [an electric personal assistive mobility device] [a
    wheelchair] on [a public right-of-way] [crosswalk] [shoulder of the
    roadway]].
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    Patterson v. State, 
    512 So. 2d 1109
    (Fla. 1stst DCA 1987).
    “Willfully” means intentionally, knowingly, and purposely.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.062, Fla. Stat.
    “Identifying information” means the name, address, vehicle registration
    number, and, if available and requested, the exhibition of the defendant’s
    license or permit to drive.
    - 28 -
    “Reasonable assistance” includes carrying or making arrangement to
    carry the injured person to a physician or hospital for medical treatment.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    “Vehicle” means every device, in, upon, or by which any person or
    property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, excepting
    devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.027(1)(a), Fla. Stat.
    “Serious bodily injury” means an injury to a person [including the
    driver,] which consists of a physical condition that creates a substantial risk of
    death, serious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function
    of a bodily member or organ.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Injury or Death and then Causing Serious
    Injury Bodily Injury or Death) —
    316.1935(4)(b) and 316.027(2)(c)
    CATEGORY ONE          CATEGORY TWO              FLA.STAT.        INS. NO.
    Leaving Scene of a                            316.027(2)(c)       28.4
    Crash Involving
    Death*
    Leaving the Scene of                          316.027(2)(b)       28.4
    a Crash Involving
    Serious Bodily
    Injury*
    Aggravated Fleeing                            316.1935(4)(a)      28.84
    Fleeing to Elude LEO                          316.1935(1)         28.6
    Leaving Scene of a                            316.027(1)(b)       28.4
    Crash Involving
    Death
    Leaving Scene of a                            316.027(1)(a)(2)(a) 28.4
    Crash Involving
    Injury*
    Fleeing to Elude LEO                          316.1935(1)         28.6
    Fleeing to Elude LEO 316.1935(3)(b)         28.81
    Fleeing to Elude LEO 316.1935(3)(a)         28.8
    Fleeing to Elude LEO 316.1935(2)            28.7
    - 29 -
    Reckless Driving (if                             316.192(1)(b)        28.5
    there was evidence
    that the fleeing was in
    a motor vehicle)
    Disobedience to
    Police or Fire         316.072(3)           28.18
    Department Officials
    Comments
    * § 316.1935(4), Fla. Stat., states that a person may be charged with both
    Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding and Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving Death,
    Serious Bodily Injury, or Injury. Therefore, if a Leaving the Scene crime is
    charged as a separate count, then Leaving the Scene should not be given as a
    lesser-included offense of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding.
    For the category two lesser included offense of Disobedience to Police, see
    Koch v. State, 
    39 So. 3d 464
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
    See Mancuso v. State, 
    652 So. 2d 370
    (Fla. 1995), State v. Dumas, 
    700 So. 2d
    1223 (Fla. 1997), and State v. Dorsett, 
    158 So. 3d 557
    (Fla. 2015).
    This instruction was adopted in 2008 [
    976 So. 2d 1081
    ] and amended in
    2011 [
    73 So. 3d 136
    ], and 2015 [
    166 So. 3d 161
    ], and 2016.
    28.8(c) AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Damage to a Vehicle or Property then Causing
    Serious Bodily Injury or Death)
    § 316.1935(4)(b) and § 316.061, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding, the State must
    prove the following seven elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash or
    accident.
    2.    The crash or accident resulted only in damage to a vehicle
    or other property.
    - 30 -
    3.    The [vehicle] [other property] was [driven] [attended] by [a
    person] [(name of person)].
    4.    (Defendant) failed to stop at the scene of the crash or
    accident or as close to the crash or accident as possible and
    remain there until [he] [she] had given “identifying
    information” to the [driver or occupant of the damaged
    vehicle] [person attending the damaged vehicle or property]
    [and to any police officer at the scene of the crash or
    accident or who is investigating the crash or accident.
    5.    A duly authorized law enforcement officer ordered
    (defendant) to stop.
    6.    (Defendant), knowing [he] [she] had been ordered to stop by
    a law enforcement officer, [willfully refused or failed to stop
    [his] [her] vehicle in compliance with the order to stop] [and
    after having stopped in knowing compliance with the order
    to stop, willfully fled in a vehicle in an attempt to elude the
    law enforcement officer].
    7.    As a result of (defendant) fleeing or eluding, [he] she] caused
    [serious bodily injury to] [the death of] (name of victim).
    If the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant failed
    to give any part of the “identifying information,” the State satisfies this
    element of the offense.
    Definitions.
    Patterson v. State, 
    512 So. 2d 1109
    (Fla. 1stst DCA 1987).
    “Willfully” means intentionally, knowingly, and purposely.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.062(1), Fla. Stat.
    “Identifying information” means the name, address, vehicle registration
    number, and, if available and requested, the exhibition of the defendant’s
    license or permit to drive.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    “Vehicle” means every device, in, upon, or by which any person or
    property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, excepting
    devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    - 31 -
    Lesser Included Offenses
    AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Damage to a Vehicle or Property then Causing
    Serious Bodily Injury or Death) — 316.1935(4)(b) and 316.061
    CATEGORY ONE            CATEGORY TWO            FLA.STAT.        INS. NO.
    Aggravated Fleeing                              316.1935(4)(a) 28.85
    Fleeing to Elude LEO                            316.1935(1)       28.6
    Leaving the Scene of a                          316.061           28.4(a)
    Crash Involving
    Damage to Vehicle or
    Property*
    Fleeing to Elude LEO   316.1935(3)(b) 28.81
    Fleeing to Elude LEO   316.1935(3)(a) 28.8
    Fleeing to Elude LEO   316.1935(2)       28.7
    Reckless Driving (if                            316.192(1)(b)     28.5
    there was evidence
    that the fleeing was in
    a motor vehicle)
    Disobedience to Police 316.072(3)        28.18
    or Fire Department
    Officials
    Comments
    * § 316.1935(4), Fla. Stat., states that a person may be charged with both
    Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding and Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving
    Damage to Attended Property. Therefore, if Leaving the Scene is charged as a
    separate count, then Leaving the Scene should not be given as a lesser-included
    offense of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding.
    As of September 2015, there was no case law directly addressing the issue of
    whether the State must prove the defendant knew, or should have known, of either
    the crash or the property damage to violate this statute. Compare State v. Dorsett,
    
    158 So. 3d 557
    (Fla. 2015) and Mancuso v. State, 
    652 So. 2d 370
    (Fla. 1995)
    dealing with § 316.027, Fla. Stat., which, unlike § 316.061, Fla. Stat., contains an
    explicit willfulness requirement.
    For the category two lesser included offense of Disobedience to Police, see
    Koch v. State, 
    39 So. 3d 464
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
    - 32 -
    This instruction was adopted in 2008 [
    976 So. 2d 1081
    ] and amended in
    2011 [
    73 So. 3d 136
    ], and 2015 [
    166 So. 3d 161
    ], and 2016.
    28.8(d) AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Serious Bodily Injury, Injury or Death then
    Causing Injury or Property Damage to Another)
    § 316.1935(4)(a) and § 316.027 Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding, the State must
    prove the following seven elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.     (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash or
    accident occurring on public or private property resulting
    in [serious bodily injury to] [injury to] [the death of] any
    person.
    2.     (Defendant) knew that [he] [she] was involved in a crash or
    accident.
    Give 3a if death is charged or 3b if serious bodily injury or injury is
    charged.
    3.    a.     (Defendant) knew, or should have known from all of
    the circumstances, including the nature of the crash
    or accident, of the injury to or death of the person.
    b.    (Defendant) knew, or should have known from all of
    the circumstances, including the nature of the crash
    or accident, of the injury to the person.
    Give 4a or 4b or both as applicable.
    4.    (Defendant)
    a.    willfully failed to stop at the scene of the crash or
    accident or as close to the crash or accident as
    possible and remain there until [he] [she] had given
    “identifying information” to the [injured person]
    [driver] [occupant] [person attending the vehicle or
    other damaged property] and to any police officer
    investigating the crash or accident.
    - 33 -
    [or]
    b.     willfully failed to render “reasonable assistance” to
    the injured person if such treatment appeared to be
    necessary or was requested by the injured person.
    5.    A duly authorized law enforcement officer ordered
    (defendant) to stop.
    6.    (Defendant) knowing [he] [she] had been ordered to stop by
    a law enforcement officer, [willfully refused or failed to stop
    [his][her]vehicle in compliance with the order to stop][and
    after having stopped in knowing compliance with the order
    to stop, willfully fled in a vehicle in an attempt to elude the
    law enforcement officer.]
    7.    As a result of (defendant) fleeing or eluding, [he] [she]
    caused [an injury to] [damage to the property of] (name of
    victim).
    § 316.027, Fla. Stat.
    A driver has the legal duty to immediately stop [his] [her] vehicle at the
    scene of the crash or accident or as close to the scene of the crash or accident
    as possible and provide “identifying information.”
    If the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
    willfully failed to give any part of the “identifying information” or willfully
    failed to give reasonable assistance, the State satisfies this element of the
    offense.
    Enhancement. Give when the State alleged the victim was a “vulnerable
    road user.” § 316.027(2)(f), Fla. Stat.
    If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that
    (defendant) committed elements #1 – #4, you must then determine whether the
    State also proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [injured person] [person
    who died] in element #1 was:
    [a pedestrian].
    [actually engaged in work upon a highway].
    [actually engaged in work upon utility facilities along a highway].
    - 34 -
    [engaged in the provision of emergency services within the right-
    of-way].
    [operating a [bicycle] [motorcycle] [scooter] [moped] lawfully on
    the roadway].
    [riding an animal].
    [lawfully operating [a farm tractor or similar vehicle designed
    primarily for farm use] [a skateboard] [roller-skates] [in-line
    skates] [a horse-drawn carriage] [an electric personal assistive mobility
    device] [a wheelchair] on [a public right-of-way]
    [crosswalk] [shoulder of the roadway]].
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    Patterson v. State, 
    512 So. 2d 1109
    (Fla. 1stst DCA 1987).
    “Willfully” means intentionally, knowingly, and purposely.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.062, Fla. Stat.
    “Identifying information” means the name, address, vehicle registration
    number, and, if available and requested, the exhibition of the defendant’s
    license or permit to drive.
    “Reasonable assistance” includes carrying or making arrangement to
    carry the injured person to a physician or hospital for medical treatment.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    “Vehicle” means every device, in, upon, or by which any person or
    property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, excepting
    devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    § 316.027(1)(a), Fla. Stat.
    “Serious bodily injury” means an injury to a person [including the
    driver,] which consists of a physical condition that creates a substantial risk of
    death, serious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function
    of a bodily member or organ.
    - 35 -
    Lesser Included Offenses
    AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Injury or Death and then Causing Injury or
    Property Damage to Another) —
    316.1935(4)(a) and § 316.027(2)(c)
    CATEGORY ONE             CATEGORY TWO              FLA.STAT.        INS. NO.
    Leaving Scene of a                               316.027(2)(c)       28.4
    Crash Involving
    Death*
    Leaving Scene of                                 316.027(2)(b)       28.4
    Crash Involving
    Serious Bodily
    Injury*
    Fleeing to Elude LEO                             316.1935(1)         28.6
    Leaving Scene of a                               316.027(1)(b)       28.4
    Crash Involving
    Death
    Leaving Scene of a                               316.027(1)(a)(2)(a) 28.4
    Crash Involving
    Injury*
    Fleeing to Elude LEO                             316.1935(1)         28.6
    Fleeing to Elude LEO 316.1935(3)(b)         28.81
    Fleeing to Elude LEO 316.1935(3)(a)         28.8
    Fleeing to Elude LEO 316.1935(2)            28.7
    Reckless Driving (if                             316.192(1)(b)       28.5
    there was evidence
    that the fleeing was in
    a motor vehicle)
    Disobedience to
    Police or Fire          316.072(3)          28.18
    Department Officials
    Comments
    * § 316.1935(4), Fla. Stat., states that a person may be charged with both
    Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding and Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving Death,
    Serious Bodily Injury, or Injury. Therefore, if a Leaving the Scene crime is
    - 36 -
    charged as a separate count, then Leaving the Scene should not be given as a
    lesser-included offense of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding.
    For the category two lesser included offense of Disobedience to Police, see
    Koch v. State, 
    39 So. 3d 464
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
    See Mancuso v. State, 
    652 So. 2d 370
    (Fla. 1995), State v. Dumas, 
    700 So. 2d
    1223 (Fla. 1997), and State v. Dorsett, 
    158 So. 3d 557
    (Fla. 2015).
    This instruction was adopted in 2008 [
    976 So. 2d 1081
    ] and amended in
    2011 [
    73 So. 3d 136
    ], 2015 [
    166 So. 3d 161
    ], and 2016.
    28.8(e) AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving a Crash Involving Damage to a Vehicle or Property then Causing
    Injury or Property Damage to Another)
    § 316.1935(4)(a) and § 316.061, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding, the State must
    prove the following seven elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash or
    accident.
    2.    The crash or accident resulted only in damage to a vehicle
    or other property.
    3.    The [vehicle] [other property] was [driven] [attended] by [a
    person] [(name of person)].
    4.    (Defendant) failed to stop at the scene of the crash or
    accident or as close to the crash or accident as possible and
    remain there until [he] [she] had given “identifying
    information” to the [driver or occupant of the damaged
    vehicle] [person attending the damaged vehicle or property]
    [and to any police officer at the scene of the crash or
    accident or who is investigating the crash or accident].
    5.    A duly authorized law enforcement officer ordered
    (defendant) to stop.
    - 37 -
    6.    (Defendant), knowing [he] [she] had been ordered to stop by
    a law enforcement officer, [willfully refused or failed to stop
    [his] [her] vehicle in compliance with the order to stop] [and
    after having stopped in knowing compliance with the order
    to stop, willfully fled in a vehicle in an attempt to elude the
    law enforcement officer].
    7.    As a result of (defendant) fleeing or eluding, [he] [she]
    caused [injury to] [damage to the property of] (name of
    victim).
    If the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant failed
    to give any part of the “identifying information,” the State satisfies this
    element of the offense.
    Definitions.
    Patterson v. State, 
    512 So. 2d 1109
    (Fla. 1stst DCA 1987).
    “Willfully” means intentionally, knowingly, and purposely.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.062(1), Fla. Stat.
    “Identifying information” means the name, address, vehicle registration
    number, and, if available and requested, the exhibition of the defendant’s
    license or permit to drive.
    Fla. Stat. § 316.003(75), Fla. Stat.
    “Vehicle” means every device, in, upon, or by which any person or
    property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, excepting
    devices used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    AGGRAVATED FLEEING OR ELUDING
    (Leaving A Crash Involving Damage to a Vehicle or Property then Causing
    Injury or Property Damage to Another) — 316.1935(4)(a) and 316.061
    CATEGORY ONE           CATEGORY TWO         FLA.STAT.         INS. NO.
    Fleeing to Elude LEO                        316.1935(1)       28.6
    Leaving the Scene of a                      316.061           28.4(a)
    Crash Involving
    Damage to Vehicle or
    Property*
    - 38 -
    Fleeing to Elude LEO     316.1935(3)(b)     28.81
    Fleeing to Elude LEO     316.1935(3)(a)     28.8
    Fleeing to Elude LEO     316.1935(2)        28.7
    Reckless Driving (if                               316.192(1)(b)      28.5
    there was evidence
    that the fleeing was in
    a motor vehicle)
    Disobedience to Police   316.072(3)         28.18
    or Fire Department
    Officials
    Comments
    * § 316.1935(4), Fla. Stat., states that a person may be charged with both
    Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding and Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving
    Damage to Attended Property. Therefore, if Leaving the Scene is charged as a
    separate count, then Leaving the Scene should not be given as a lesser-included
    offense of Aggravated Fleeing or Eluding.
    As of September 2015, there was no case law directly addressing the issue of
    whether the State must prove the defendant knew, or should have known, of either
    the crash or the property damage to violate this statute. Compare State v. Dorsett,
    
    158 So. 3d 557
    (Fla. 2015) and Mancuso v. State, 
    652 So. 2d 370
    (Fla. 1995)
    dealing with § 316.027, Fla. Stat., which, unlike § 316.061, Fla. Stat., contains an
    explicit willfulness requirement.
    For the category two lesser included offense of Disobedience to Police, see
    Koch v. State, 
    39 So. 3d 464
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
    This instruction was adopted in 2008 [
    976 So. 2d 1081
    ] and amended in
    2011 [
    73 So. 3d 136
    ], and 2015 [
    166 So. 3d 161
    ], and 2016.
    28.14 BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
    § 327.35(1), Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Boating under the Influence, the State must prove
    the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.     (Defendant) operated a vessel.
    - 39 -
    2.    While operating the vessel, (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.     had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    Give if applicable. § 327.35(4), Fla. Stat.
    If you find the defendant guilty of Boating under the Influence, you
    must also determine whether the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt
    whether:
    a.     the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    .15 or higher while operating the vessel.
    b.     the defendant was accompanied in the vessel by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    bBoating under the iInfluence.
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    State v. Davis, 
    110 So. 3d 27
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).
    “Vessel” means a boat and includes every description of watercraft,
    barge, and airboat, other than a seaplane, on the water used or capable of
    being used as a means of transportation on water.
    § 327.354(1), Fla. Stat.
    “Normal faculties” include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, operate a vessel, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    § 327.02(30), Fla. Stat.
    “Operate” means to be in charge of or in command of [or in actual
    physical control of] a vessel upon the waters of this state, or to exercise control
    over or to have responsibility for a vessel’s navigation or safety while the
    vessel is underway upon the waters of this state, or to control or steer a vessel
    being towed by another vessel upon the waters of the state.
    - 40 -
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    “Alcoholic beverages” are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (             ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (             ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    When appropriate, give one or more of the following instructions on the
    “presumptions of impairment” established by Give if appropriate. § 327.354(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.     If you find from the evidence that while operating or
    in actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.      If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.      If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    - 41 -
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 327.354(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with boating with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant operated a vessel with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level,
    impairment becomes moot. Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Boating under the Influence if the vessel
    was inoperable at the time of the alleged offense, unless the defendant was
    controlling or steering the vessel while it was being towed by another vessel
    upon the waters of the state. However, it is not a defense if the defendant was
    boating under the influence before the vessel became inoperable.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE — 327.35(1)
    CATEGORY ONE   CATEGORY TWO          FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
    None
    Attempt               777.04(1)  5.1
    Comment
    This instruction was adopted in 2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ], and amended in 2012
    [
    87 So. 3d 679
    ], and 2014 [
    146 So. 3d 1110
    ], and 2016.
    - 42 -
    28.15 BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING
    PROPERTY DAMAGE OR INJURY
    § 327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)1, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Boating under the Influence Causing [Property
    Damage] [Injury], the State must prove the following three elements beyond a
    reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) operated a vessel.
    2.    While operating the vessel, (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.    had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    3.    As a result of operating the vessel, (defendant) caused or
    contributed to causing [damage to the property of (victim)]
    [injury to the person of (victim)].
    Give if applicable. § 327.35(4), Fla. Stat.
    If you find the defendant guilty of Boating under the Influence Causing
    [Property Damage] [Injury], you must also determine whether the State has
    proven beyond a reasonable doubt whether:
    a.    the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    .15 or higher while operating the vessel.
    b.    the defendant was accompanied in the vessel by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    bBoating under the iInfluence.
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    State v. Davis, 
    110 So. 3d 27
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).
    “Vessel” means a boat and includes every description of watercraft,
    barge, and airboat, other than a seaplane, on the water used or capable of
    being used as a means of transportation on water.
    - 43 -
    § 327.354(1), Fla. Stat.
    “Normal faculties” include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, operate a vessel, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    § 327.02(30), Fla. Stat.
    “Operate” means to be in charge of or in command of [or in actual
    physical control of] a vessel upon the waters of this state, or to exercise control
    over or to have responsibility for a vessel’s navigation or safety while the
    vessel is underway upon the waters of this state, or to control or steer a vessel
    being towed by another vessel upon the waters of the state.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    “Alcoholic beverages” are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (             ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (             ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    When appropriate, give one or more of the following instructions on the
    “presumptions of impairment” established by Give if appropriate. § 327.354(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.     If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.      If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    - 44 -
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.     If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 327.354(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with boating with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant operated a vessel with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level,
    impairment becomes moot. Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Boating under the Influence Causing
    [Property Damage] [Injury] if the vessel was inoperable at the time of the
    alleged offense, unless the defendant was controlling or steering the vessel
    while it was being towed by another vessel upon the waters of the state.
    However, it is not a defense if the defendant was boating under the influence
    before the vessel became inoperable.
    - 45 -
    Lesser Included Offenses
    BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING PROPERTY
    DAMAGE OR INJURY — 327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)1.
    CATEGORY ONE        CATEGORY TWO      FLA. STAT. INS. NO.
    Boating under the                     327.35(1)       28.14
    Influence
    Attempt           777.04(1)       5.1
    Comment
    This instruction was adopted in 2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ] and amended in 2012
    [
    87 So. 3d 679
    ], and 2014 [
    146 So. 3d 1110
    ], and 2016.
    28.16 FELONY BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
    § 327.35(2)(b)1. or § 327.35(2)(b)3., Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Boating under the Influence, the State must prove
    the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
    1.    (Defendant) operated a vessel.
    2.    While operating the vessel, (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.    had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    Give if applicable. § 327.35(4), Fla. Stat.
    If you find the defendant guilty of Boating under the Influence, you
    must also determine whether the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt
    whether:
    a.    the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .
    15 or higher while operating the vessel.
    - 46 -
    b.   the defendant was accompanied in the vessel by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    bBoating under the iInfluence.
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    State v. Davis, 
    110 So. 3d 27
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).
    “Vessel” means a boat and includes every description of watercraft,
    barge, and airboat, other than a seaplane, on the water used or capable of
    being used as a means of transportation on water.
    § 327.354(1), Fla. Stat.
    “Normal faculties” include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, operate a vessel, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    § 327.02(30), Fla. Stat.
    “Operate” means to be in charge of or in command of [or in actual
    physical control of] a vessel upon the waters of this state, or to exercise control
    over or to have responsibility for a vessel’s navigation or safety while the
    vessel is underway upon the waters of this state, or to control or steer a vessel
    being towed by another vessel upon the waters of the state.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    “Alcoholic beverages” are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (            ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (            ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    When appropriate, give one or more of the following instructions on the
    “presumptions of impairment” established by Give if appropriate. § 327.354(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.     If you find from the evidence that while operating or
    in actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    - 47 -
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.     If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.      If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 327.354(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with boating with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant operated a vessel with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level,
    impairment becomes moot. Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Boating under the Influence if the vessel
    was inoperable at the time of the alleged offense, unless the defendant was
    controlling or steering the vessel while it was being towed by another vessel
    - 48 -
    upon the waters of the state. However, it is not a defense if the defendant was
    boating under the influence before the vessel became inoperable.
    Give as applicable if the jury finds the defendant is guilty of Boating Under
    the Influence. Note: A Driving Under the Influence conviction, whether in Florida
    or out-of-state, counts as a prior conviction. See §327.35(6)(i), Fla. Stat. See State
    v. Harbaugh, 
    754 So. 2d 691
    (Fla. 2000).
    Since you have found the defendant guilty of Boating under the
    Influence, you must now determine whether the State has proven beyond a
    reasonable doubt whether:
    a.    the defendant was previously convicted two times of
    Boating under the Influence and one of the prior
    Boating under the Influence convictions took place
    within 10 years of the Boating under the Influence
    that you found the defendant committed.
    b.    the defendant was previously convicted three times of
    Boating under the Influence.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    FELONY BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE —
    PRIOR CONVICTIONS — 327.35(2)(b)1. or 327.35(2)(b)3.
    CATEGORY          CATEGORY         FLA. STAT.           INS. NO.
    ONE               TWO
    Boating under                      327.35(1)            28.14
    the influence
    Attempt          777.04(1)            5.1
    Boating under    327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)1. 28.15
    the influence
    causing property
    damage or injury
    Comments
    This instruction should be used for Felony Boating under the Influence
    based on prior convictions. For Felony Boating under the Influence based on prior
    convictions, it is error to inform the jury of prior Boating or Driving under the
    - 49 -
    Influence convictions before the verdict is rendered. Therefore, if the information
    or indictment contains an allegation of prior Boating or Driving under the
    Influence convictions, do not read that allegation and do not send the information
    or indictment into the jury room. If the defendant is found guilty of Boating under
    the Influence, the historical fact of prior convictions shall be determined separately
    by the jury in a bifurcated proceeding. See State v. Harbaugh, 
    754 So. 2d 691
    (Fla.
    2000).
    This instruction was adopted in 2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ] and amended in 2012
    [
    87 So. 3d 679
    ], and 2014 [
    146 So. 3d 1110
    ], and 2016.
    28.17 BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
    CAUSING SERIOUS BODILY INJURY
    § 327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)2, Fla. Stat.
    To prove the crime of Boating under the Influence Causing Serious
    Bodily Injury, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a
    reasonable doubt:
    1.     (Defendant) operated a vessel.
    2.     While operating the vessel, (defendant)
    Give 2a or 2b or both as applicable.
    a.    was under the influence of [alcoholic beverages] [a
    chemical substance] [a controlled substance] to the
    extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    b.    had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more
    grams of alcohol per [100 milliliters of blood] [210
    liters of breath].
    3.     As a result of operating the vessel, (defendant) caused or
    contributed to causing serious bodily injury to (victim).
    Give if applicable. § 327.35(4), Fla. Stat.
    If you find the defendant guilty of Boating under the Influence Causing
    Serious Bodily Injury, you must also determine whether the State has proven
    beyond a reasonable doubt whether:
    - 50 -
    a.   the defendant had a [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of
    .15 or higher while operating the vessel.
    b.   the defendant was accompanied in the vessel by a
    person under the age of 18 years at the time of the
    boating under the influence.
    Definitions. Give as applicable.
    State v. Davis, 
    110 So. 3d 27
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).
    “Vessel” means a boat and includes every description of watercraft,
    barge, and airboat, other than a seaplane, on the water used or capable of
    being used as a means of transportation on water.
    § 327.354(1), Fla. Stat.
    “Normal faculties” include but are not limited to the ability to see, hear,
    walk, talk, judge distances, operate a vessel, make judgments, act in
    emergencies and, in general, to normally perform the many mental and
    physical acts of our daily lives.
    § 327.02(30), Fla. Stat.
    “Operate” means to be in charge of or in command of [or in actual
    physical control of] a vessel upon the waters of this state, or to exercise control
    over or to have responsibility for a vessel’s navigation or safety while the
    vessel is underway upon the waters of this state, or to control or steer a vessel
    being towed by another vessel upon the waters of the state.
    Shaw v. State, 
    783 So. 2d 1097
    (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
    Impaired means diminished in some material respect.
    § 322.01(2), Fla. Stat.
    “Alcoholic beverages” are considered to be substances of any kind and
    description which contain alcohol.
    (            ) is a controlled substance under Florida law. Ch. 893, Fla.
    Stat.
    (            ) is a chemical substance under Florida law. § 877.111(1),
    Fla. Stat.
    § 327.353(1)(b), Fla. Stat.
    - 51 -
    “Serious bodily injury” means a physical condition that creates a
    substantial risk of death, serious personal disfigurement, or protracted loss or
    impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.
    When appropriate, give one or more of the following instructions on the
    “presumptions of impairment” established by Give if appropriate. § 327.354(2)(a),
    and (2)(b), and (2)(c), Fla. Stat.
    1.     If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .05 or less, you shall
    presume that the defendant was not under the influence of
    alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal
    faculties were impaired; but this presumption may be
    overcome by other evidence demonstrating that the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    2.    If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level in excess of .05 but less than
    .08, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the
    defendant was or was not under the influence of alcoholic
    beverages to the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were
    impaired. In such cases, you may consider that evidence
    along with other evidence in determining whether the
    defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to
    the extent that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired.
    3.    If you find from the evidence that while operating or in
    actual physical control of the vessel, the defendant had a
    [blood] [breath]-alcohol level of .08 or more, that evidence
    would be sufficient by itself to establish that the defendant
    was under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent
    that [his] [her] normal faculties were impaired. But this
    evidence may be contradicted or rebutted by other evidence
    demonstrating that the defendant was not under the
    influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent that [his] [her]
    normal faculties were impaired.
    - 52 -
    It is not necessary to instruct on the “prima facie evidence of impairment”
    in § 327.354(2)(c), Fla. Stat., if the State charged the defendant with boating with
    a blood or breath-alcohol level of .08 or over. In those cases, if the jury finds that
    the defendant operated a vessel with an unlawful blood or breath-alcohol level,
    impairment becomes moot. Tyner v. State, 
    805 So. 2d 862
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
    Defense of inoperability; give if applicable.
    It is a defense to the charge of Boating under the Influence Causing
    Serious Bodily Injury if the vessel was inoperable at the time of the alleged
    offense, unless the defendant was controlling or steering the vessel while it was
    being towed by another vessel upon the waters of the state. However, it is not
    a defense if the defendant was boating under the influence before the vessel
    became inoperable.
    Lesser Included Offenses
    BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CAUSING
    SERIOUS BODILY INJURY — 327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)2.
    CATEGORY          CATEGORY         FLA. STAT.           INS. NO.
    ONE               TWO
    Boating under the                  327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)1. 28.15
    Influence
    Causing Injury
    Boating under the                  327.35(1)            28.14
    influence
    Attempt          777.04(1)            5.1
    Boating under    327.35(3)(a)(b)(c)1. 28.15
    the influence
    causing property
    damage
    Comment
    This instruction was adopted in 2009 [
    6 So. 3d 574
    ] and amended in 2012
    [
    87 So. 3d 679
    ], and 2014 [
    146 So. 3d 1110
    ], and 2016.
    - 53 -