106.23
Powers of the Division of Elections.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
106.23 Powers of the Division of Elections.—
(1) In order to carry out the responsibilities prescribed by s. 106.22, the Division of Elections is empowered to subpoena and bring before its duly authorized representatives any person in the state, or any person doing business in the state, or any person who has filed or is required to have filed any application, document, papers, or other information with an office or agency of this state or a political subdivision thereof and to require the production of any papers, books, or other records relevant to any investigation, including the records and accounts of any bank or trust company doing business in this state. Duly authorized representatives of the division are empowered to administer all oaths and affirmations in the manner prescribed by law to witnesses who shall appear before them concerning any relevant matter. Should any witness fail to respond to the lawful subpoena of the division or, having responded, fail to answer all lawful inquiries or to turn over evidence that has been subpoenaed, the division may file a complaint before any circuit court of the state setting up such failure on the part of the witness. On the filing of such complaint, the court shall take jurisdiction of the witness and the subject matter of said complaint and shall direct the witness to respond to all lawful questions and to produce all documentary evidence in the witness’s possession which is lawfully demanded. The failure of any witness to comply with such order of the court shall constitute a direct and criminal contempt of court, and the court shall punish said witness accordingly. However, the refusal by a witness to answer inquiries or turn over evidence on the basis that such testimony or material will tend to incriminate such witness shall not be deemed refusal to comply with the provisions of this chapter.
(2) The Division of Elections shall provide advisory opinions when requested by any supervisor of elections, candidate, local officer having election-related duties, political party, affiliated party committee, political committee, or other person or organization engaged in political activity, relating to any provisions or possible violations of Florida election laws with respect to actions such supervisor, candidate, local officer having election-related duties, political party, affiliated party committee, committee, person, or organization has taken or proposes to take. Requests for advisory opinions must be submitted in accordance with rules adopted by the Department of State. A written record of all such opinions issued by the division, sequentially numbered, dated, and indexed by subject matter, shall be retained. A copy shall be sent to said person or organization upon request. Any such person or organization, acting in good faith upon such an advisory opinion, shall not be subject to any criminal penalty provided for in this chapter. The opinion, until amended or revoked, shall be binding on any person or organization who sought the opinion or with reference to whom the opinion was sought, unless material facts were omitted or misstated in the request for the advisory opinion.
History.—s. 23, ch. 73-128; s. 3, ch. 76-233; s. 58, ch. 77-175; s. 651, ch. 95-147; s. 47, ch. 97-13; s. 8, ch. 2001-75; ss. 23, 30, ch. 2011-6; HJR 7105, 2011 Regular Session; s. 23, ch. 2013-37.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Smith v. Crawford
Smith v. Crawford (1994)
“[6] Section 106.23 does not require that the Secretary of State personally participate in the preparation of advisory opinions or that he review and approve an opinion before its release by the Division.”
Kelvin Leon Jones v. Governor of Florida (2020)
“See Fla. Stat. § 106.23 (2) (setting forth the advisory opinion process).”
Krivanek v. TAKE BACK TAMPA POLITICAL COM. (1993)
“87-16 (1987), partially receded from on other grounds, Op.Div.Elec. Fla.”
Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd. v. Harris (2000)
“on the seventh day after an election, the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, pursuant to section 106.23, Florida Statutes (2000), sought an advisory opinion from the Division of Elections, requesting an interpretation of the deadline set forth in sections 102.”
League of Women Voters of Fla., Inc. v. Detzner (2018)
“") (quoting Fla. Stat. § 106.23 (2). This argument is faulty for a host of reasons.”
Miller v. Mendez (2001)
“See § 106.23(2), Fla. Stat. (1999). Although an advisory opinion is not binding judicial precedent, it is persuasive, and if the Division’s opinion is reasonable, it is given great weight.”
Gonzalez v. Vogel (1993)
“[2] See § 106.23(2), Fla. Stat. (1991). [3] Assuming the trial court had found a violation of the leave of absence requirement, we do not need to decide whether disqualification would be the only remedy available to the trial court under section 99.”
Robert C. Touchston v. Michael McDermott (2000)
“Fla. Stat. § 106.23 (2). 37 opinion issued by the Division of Elections.”
Sullivan v. Division of Elections (1982)
“Appellant seeks review of an advisory opinion issued by the Division of Elections, Department of State, in accordance with section 106.23(2), Florida Statutes (1981).”
Kelvin Leon Jones v. Governor of Florida (2020)
“See Fla. Stat. § 106.23 (2) (setting forth the advisory opinion process).”
Byrd v. Smart and Safe Florida (2026)
“” In its initial brief, SSF similarly characterized the directives, stating that they “lack the force of law” and cannot be considered advisory opinions under section 106.23(2), Florida Statutes. Assuming without deciding that, as SSF contends, the Secretary’s e-mail directions…”
WFSH of Niceville v. City of Niceville (1982)
“Section 106.23(2) provides: The Division of Elections shall provide advisory opinions when requested by any supervisor of elections, candidate, local officer having election related duties .”
— 106.23(2) — 6 cases
Smith v. Crawford (1994)
“[6] Section 106.23 does not require that the Secretary of State personally participate in the preparation of advisory opinions or that he review and approve an opinion before its release by the Division.”
Miller v. Mendez (2001)
“See § 106.23(2), Fla. Stat. (1999). Although an advisory opinion is not binding judicial precedent, it is persuasive, and if the Division’s opinion is reasonable, it is given great weight.”
Gonzalez v. Vogel (1993)
“[2] See § 106.23(2), Fla. Stat. (1991). [3] Assuming the trial court had found a violation of the leave of absence requirement, we do not need to decide whether disqualification would be the only remedy available to the trial court under section 99.”
Sullivan v. Division of Elections (1982)
“Appellant seeks review of an advisory opinion issued by the Division of Elections, Department of State, in accordance with section 106.23(2), Florida Statutes (1981).”
Byrd v. Smart and Safe Florida (2026)
“” In its initial brief, SSF similarly characterized the directives, stating that they “lack the force of law” and cannot be considered advisory opinions under section 106.23(2), Florida Statutes. Assuming without deciding that, as SSF contends, the Secretary’s e-mail directions…”
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.