92.565
Admissibility of confession in sexual abuse cases.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
92.565 Admissibility of confession in sexual abuse cases.—
(1) As used in this section, the term “sexual abuse” means an act of a sexual nature or sexual act that may be prosecuted under any law of this state, including those offenses specifically designated in subsection (2).
(2) In any criminal action in which the defendant is charged with a crime against a victim under s. 787.06(3), involving commercial sexual activity, or (5); s. 794.011; s. 794.05; s. 800.04; s. 826.04; s. 827.03, involving sexual abuse; s. 827.04, involving sexual abuse; s. 827.071; or s. 847.0135(5), or any other crime involving sexual abuse of another, or with any attempt, solicitation, or conspiracy to commit any of these crimes, the defendant’s memorialized confession or admission is admissible during trial without the state having to prove a corpus delicti of the crime if the court finds in a hearing conducted outside the presence of the jury that the state is unable to show the existence of each element of the crime, and having so found, further finds that the defendant’s confession or admission is trustworthy. Factors which may be relevant in determining whether the state is unable to show the existence of each element of the crime include, but are not limited to, the fact that, at the time the crime was committed, the victim was:
(a) Physically helpless, mentally incapacitated, or mentally defective, as those terms are defined in s. 794.011;
(b) Physically incapacitated due to age, infirmity, or any other cause; or
(c) Less than 12 years of age.
(3) Before the court admits the defendant’s confession or admission, the state must prove by a preponderance of evidence that there is sufficient corroborating evidence that tends to establish the trustworthiness of the statement by the defendant. Hearsay evidence is admissible during the presentation of evidence at the hearing. In making its determination, the court may consider all relevant corroborating evidence, including the defendant’s statements.
(4) The court shall make specific findings of fact, on the record, for the basis of its ruling.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2000-204; s. 10, ch. 2008-172; s. 2, ch. 2017-23; s. 1, ch. 2025-156.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: State v. Dionne
State v. Dionne (2002)
“[1] The trial court held that application of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2000), which was enacted after the date of Dionne's alleged incident, violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of both the United States and Florida Constitutions.”
Hernandez v. State (2007)
“Hernandez's confession into evidence under section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2004), because it failed to make the specific findings of fact required by the statute.”
State v. Tumlinson (2016)
“Because the trial court correctly applied section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2014), and this court's holding in Geiger v.”
Kelly v. State (2006)
“§ 92.565, Fla. Stat. (2005) (emphasis added).”
Bradley v. State (2005)
“We conclude that the confession was properly admitted under section 92.565, Florida Statutes, which creates an exception to the general rule requiring the state to prove the corpus delicti of a crime as a predicate to the introduction of a confession.”
Hobbs v. State (2008)
“The conflict issue is whether, for purposes of admitting a defendant's statement pursuant to section 92.565, Florida Statutes, a victim's recantation is relevant to the trial court's determination of whether the State is unable to show the existence of each element of the…”
State v. Hobbs (2008)
“The sole issue on appeal concerns the admissibility of Appellee's confession pursuant to section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2007), which eliminates the corpus delicti precondition for introduction of admissions and confessions in sexual abuse cases when the state is otherwise…”
Geiger v. State (2005)
“He reserved the right to appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss and his motion challenging the constitutionality of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2003), which addresses the admissibility of confessions in sexual abuse cases.”
Tanzi v. State (2007)
“Sexual Battery Confession Next, Tanzi claims that the trial court failed to follow the requirements of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2002), when admitting Tanzi's confession to sexual battery.”
Ramirez v. State (2014)
“Ramirez raises six issues on appeal, only two of which merit discussion: (1) whether the trial court erred in admitting his confession into evidence without first determining that the confession was trustworthy as required by section 92.565, Florida Statutes; and (2) whether his…”
Williams v. State (2005)
“NOTES [1] The parties did not discuss section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2003), which permits a defendant's confession or admission in a sexual abuse case to be admitted into evidence absent proof of the corpus delicti of the crime if the court finds that the confession or…”
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Florida Public Service Commission (2010)
“565, Florida Statutes, which eliminates the corpus delicti precondition for the introduction of a confession in sexual abuse cases when the State is otherwise unable to prove the crime. See Hobbs, 974 So.2d at 1120 .”
— 92.565(2) — 12 cases
State v. Hobbs (2008)
“The sole issue on appeal concerns the admissibility of Appellee's confession pursuant to section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2007), which eliminates the corpus delicti precondition for introduction of admissions and confessions in sexual abuse cases when the state is otherwise…”
Kelly v. State (2006)
“§ 92.565, Fla. Stat. (2005) (emphasis added).”
State v. Tumlinson (2016)
“Because the trial court correctly applied section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2014), and this court's holding in Geiger v.”
State v. Dionne (2002)
“[1] The trial court held that application of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2000), which was enacted after the date of Dionne's alleged incident, violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of both the United States and Florida Constitutions.”
Hobbs v. State (2008)
“The conflict issue is whether, for purposes of admitting a defendant's statement pursuant to section 92.565, Florida Statutes, a victim's recantation is relevant to the trial court's determination of whether the State is unable to show the existence of each element of the…”
— 92.565(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Dionne (2002)
“[1] The trial court held that application of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2000), which was enacted after the date of Dionne's alleged incident, violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of both the United States and Florida Constitutions.”
— 92.565(2)(c) — 1 case
— 92.565(3) — 7 cases
State v. Dionne (2002)
“[1] The trial court held that application of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2000), which was enacted after the date of Dionne's alleged incident, violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of both the United States and Florida Constitutions.”
State v. Tumlinson (2016)
“Because the trial court correctly applied section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2014), and this court's holding in Geiger v.”
Hernandez v. State (2007)
“Hernandez's confession into evidence under section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2004), because it failed to make the specific findings of fact required by the statute.”
Geiger v. State (2005)
“He reserved the right to appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss and his motion challenging the constitutionality of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2003), which addresses the admissibility of confessions in sexual abuse cases.”
Allen v. State (2011)
— 92.565(4) — 3 cases
Hernandez v. State (2007)
“Hernandez's confession into evidence under section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2004), because it failed to make the specific findings of fact required by the statute.”
State v. Tumlinson (2016)
“Because the trial court correctly applied section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2014), and this court's holding in Geiger v.”
State v. Dionne (2002)
“[1] The trial court held that application of section 92.565, Florida Statutes (2000), which was enacted after the date of Dionne's alleged incident, violates the Ex Post Facto Clause of both the United States and Florida Constitutions.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.