The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title IX
ELECTORS AND ELECTIONS

Chapter 104
ELECTION CODE: VIOLATIONS; PENALTIES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 104.13

104.13 Intermingling ballots.—Whoever willfully places any ballot in the ballot box except as properly voted by electors, or willfully intermingles any other ballots which have not been duly received during the election with the ballots which are voted by the electors, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.—s. 8, ch. 26870, 1951; s. 3, ch. 65-379; s. 32, ch. 71-136; s. 35, ch. 77-175.

F.S. 104.13 on Google Scholar

F.S. 104.13 on Casetext

Amendments to 104.13

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 104.13

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S104.13 - ELECTION LAWS - INTERMINGLE VALID WITH INVALID BALLOTS - F: T

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

COLON, v. J. ANNUCCI, F. s, 344 F. Supp. 3d 612 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

. . . Misbehavior Report ("MBR") charging him with the following Inmate Rule Violations: 102.10 Threats, 104.13 . . .

SAMUELS, v. FISCHER, D. D. M. C. R. K. L. T. R. Jr. C. J. S., 168 F. Supp. 3d 625 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)

. . . charging him with two counts of violent conduct (Rule 104.11), two counts of creating a disturbance (Rule 104.13 . . . the hearing and found Plaintiff guilty of violent conduct (Rule 104.11), creating a disturbance (Rule 104.13 . . .

SLOANE, v. BORAWSKI,, 64 F. Supp. 3d 473 (W.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . Sloane was charged with the following violations: 100.11 attempted assault; 104.11 violent conduct; 104.13 . . . I have found you guilty of the charges, 104.11 violent conduct, 104.13 creating a disturbance, 107.10 . . . Sloane was charged with the following violations: 100.11 attempted assault; 104.11 violent conduct; 104.13 . . .

WHITLEY, v. J. MILLER, D. DOCCS DOCCS, 57 F. Supp. 3d 152 (N.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . five prison disciplinary rules, including rule 100.13 (fighting); rule 104.11 (violent conduct); rule 104.13 . . .

METROPOLITAN REGIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. v. AMERICAN HOME REALTY NETWORK, INC. v., 18 F. Supp. 3d 662 (D. Md. 2013)

. . . These unopposed Motions to Seal will be granted pursuant to Local Rules 104.13 and 105.11. . . . .

INTERNATIONAL WASTE INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, v. CAPE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, INC., 988 F. Supp. 2d 542 (D. Md. 2013)

. . . These unopposed motions will be GRANTED pursuant to Local Rules 104.13 and 105.11. . . . .

METROPOLITAN REGIONAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. v. AMERICAN HOME REALTY NETWORK, INC. v., 296 F.R.D. 400 (D. Md. 2013)

. . . AHRN’s unopposed Motion to Seal will be granted pursuant to Local Rules 104.13 and 105.11. . . .

MAXTENA, INC. v. MARKS, 289 F.R.D. 427 (D. Md. 2012)

. . . Confidentiality Order requires the simultaneous filing of an interim sealing motion pursuant to Local Rule 104.13 . . .

WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE, INC. v. ALAN KRISTIN HUDSON FARM,, 278 F.R.D. 136 (D. Md. 2011)

. . . Stipulated Protective Order governing this case was entered under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c) and Local Rule 104.13 . . . R. 104.13; see Stipulated Protective Order § 6.2. . . . R. 104.13 (stating that the burden of justifying a confidentiality designation falls on the designating . . . R. 104.13; Stipulated Protective Order § 6.2. . . . R. 104.13; Stipulated Protective Order § 6.2. The record before me does not do so. III. . . .

GIRALDO v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 654 F.3d 609 (6th Cir. 2011)

. . . determined.” 8 Charles Gordon, Stanley Mailman & Stephen Yale-Loehr, 8 Immigration Law and Procedure, § 104.13 . . .

MALIN, M. D. v. SIEMENS MEDICAL SOLUTIONS HEALTH SERVICES USA,, 638 F. Supp. 2d 492 (D. Md. 2008)

. . . finds that the proposed confidentiality agreement, particularly as revised, complies with Local Rule 104.13 . . .

BLAYLOCK, v. BORDEN, Dr., 547 F. Supp. 2d 305 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . charging him with violating DOCS rules 106.10 (failure to follow a direct order); 100.13 (fighting); and 104.13 . . .

DIA, v. ASHCROFT,, 353 F.3d 228 (3d Cir. 2003)

. . . See 8 Gordon, Mailman, & Yale-Loehr, Immigration Law and Procedure, § 104.13 (stating that § 1252(b)( . . .

G. GILL, v. V. HOADLEY, J. C. L. Mr. G. Lt. J. J., 261 F. Supp. 2d 113 (N.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . defendants — alleging violation of prison rules 107.20 (lying), 106.10 (disobeying a direct order) and 104.13 . . .

SAINT FORT, v. ASHCROFT,, 329 F.3d 191 (1st Cir. 2003)

. . . Yale-Loehr, Immigration Law and Procedure § 104.13[3][c], at 104-181 to 104-182 (2003) ("Courts have . . .

GAYLE, v. P. GONYEA, T. F. Co, P. Co, T. R. T. D. S. S. P. J. S. NYS DOCS, D. H. T. J., 313 F.3d 677 (2d Cir. 2002)

. . . inmates to participate in action which may be detrimental to the order of the facility, and prison rule 104.13 . . . violation of prison rule 104.12 but not guilty of creating a disturbance in violation of prison rule 104.13 . . .

THORNTON, v. McCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS, INC., 261 F.3d 789 (9th Cir. 2001)

. . . . §§ 104.13(b), 104.35(b)(3), 104.42(b)(3) (Department of Education regulations pursuant to the Rehabilitation . . .

ANDREIU, v. RENO,, 223 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2000)

. . . See 8 Charles Gordon, Stanley Mailman & Stephen Yale-Loehr, Immigration Law and Procedure § 104.13[4] . . . See 8 Gordon, Mailman & Yale-Loehr, Immigration Law and Procedure § 104.13[4][g][ii] (subsection (f) . . .

NAIDOO v. IMMIGRATION NATURALIZATION SERVICE,, 39 F. Supp. 2d 755 (W.D. La. 1999)

. . . Reno, 18 F.Supp.2d 674, 679 (W.D.Tex.1998); 8 Charles Gordon, et al, Immigration Law and Procedure, § 104.13 . . .

COOPER HOSPITAL UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, v. M. SULLIVAN, v. FLEX SYS, 183 F.R.D. 119 (D.N.J. 1998)

. . . Berger, Wein-stein’s Federal Evidence, § 104.13[8] (Joseph M. McLaughlin, ed.,. . . . Ev. 802; see also Weinstein’s Federal Evidence, §§ 104.11[1][a], 104.13[8]. . . .

HARRIS, v. P. KEANE Lt. W. Lt. F. V. O C. O. H. C. O. A. C. O. C. O. C. C. O. G. C. O. K. C. O. L., 962 F. Supp. 397 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . Plaintiff was charged with violating Prison Rules 104.13, Creating a Disturbance; 107.10, Interference . . . 1994, an IMR was issued by Defendant O’Connor against Plaintiff, charging him with violating Rules 104.13 . . . found guilty of violating Rule 106.10, Refusing a Direct Order and found not guilty of violating Rules 104.13 . . . Plaintiff with violating Rules 106.10, Refusing a Direct Order; 109.12, Movement Regulation Violation; 104.13 . . . Refusing a Direct Order and 124.16, Messhall Serving/Seating Violation, and not guilty of violating Rules 104.13 . . .

BORKOWSKI, v. VALLEY CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT,, 63 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. 1995)

. . . . § 104.13(b); 45 C.F.R. § 84.13(b); cf. 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(7) (Americans With Disabilities Act). . . .

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, v. POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS DATA, INC., 753 F. Supp. 1122 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)

. . . . § 104.13 (1977); H.R.Rep. 422, 96th Cong., 1st Sess. 23 (1979), reprinted in FEC Legislative History . . .

GROGG, G. R. C. N. J. AFL- CIO- CLC, AFL- CIO- CLC, AFL- CIO- CLC, AFL- CIO- CLC, AFL- CIO- CLC, AFL- CIO- CLC, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,, 612 F. Supp. 1375 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . Franke 104.13 70 7,289.10 Law Students/ 37.13 25 928.25 Paralegals TOTAL $33,601.15 Thus, a total of . . .

UNITED STATES v. MASTROPIERI,, 685 F.2d 776 (2d Cir. 1982)

. . . , Federal Practice and Procedure: Evidence, § 5053 at 259-61 (1977); 10 Moore’s Federal Practice j| 104.13 . . .

UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO,, 582 F.2d 1128 (7th Cir. 1978)

. . . Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure: Evidence § 5053 at' 259-60 (1977); 10 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 104.13 . . . Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 855, 96 S.Ct. 105, 46 L.Ed.2d 81, 10 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 104.13 . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. ENRIGHT,, 579 F.2d 980 (6th Cir. 1978)

. . . J.), aff’d, 341 U.S. 494, 71 S.Ct. 857, 95 L.Ed. 1137 (1951); 11 Moore’s Federal Practice, supra, § 104.13 . . .

R. R. C. v. a a, 120 Fla. 694 (Fla. 1935)

. . . awarding the bank $1,036.70, representing the principal sum with interest; and awarded the Atwells $104.13 . . .