Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 112.532 (2025)
Law enforcement officers’ and correctional officers’ rights.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes: through the 2025 Regular Session (some sections already show 2026 laws)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
112.532 Law enforcement officers’ and correctional officers’ rights.—All law enforcement officers and correctional officers employed by or appointed to a law enforcement agency or a correctional agency shall have the following rights and privileges:
(1) RIGHTS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHILE UNDER INVESTIGATION.—Whenever a law enforcement officer or correctional officer is under investigation and subject to interrogation by members of his or her agency for any reason that could lead to disciplinary action, suspension, demotion, or dismissal, the interrogation must be conducted under the following conditions:
(a) The interrogation shall be conducted at a reasonable hour, preferably at a time when the law enforcement officer or correctional officer is on duty, unless the seriousness of the investigation is of such a degree that immediate action is required.
(b) The interrogation shall take place either at the office of the command of the investigating officer or at the office of the local precinct, police unit, or correctional unit in which the incident allegedly occurred, as designated by the investigating officer or agency.
(c) The law enforcement officer or correctional officer under investigation shall be informed of the rank, name, and command of the officer in charge of the investigation, the interrogating officer, and all persons present during the interrogation. All questions directed to the officer under interrogation shall be asked by or through one interrogator during any one investigative interrogation, unless specifically waived by the officer under investigation.
(d) The law enforcement officer or correctional officer under investigation must be informed of the nature of the investigation before any interrogation begins, and he or she must be informed of the names of all complainants. All identifiable witnesses shall be interviewed, whenever possible, prior to the beginning of the investigative interview of the accused officer. The complaint, all witness statements, including all other existing subject officer statements, and all other existing evidence, including, but not limited to, incident reports, GPS locator information, and audio or video recordings relating to the incident under investigation, must be provided to each officer who is the subject of the complaint before the beginning of any investigative interview of that officer. An officer, after being informed of the right to review witness statements, may voluntarily waive the provisions of this paragraph and provide a voluntary statement at any time.
(e) Interrogating sessions shall be for reasonable periods and shall be timed to allow for such personal necessities and rest periods as are reasonably necessary.
(f) The law enforcement officer or correctional officer under interrogation may not be subjected to offensive language or be threatened with transfer, dismissal, or disciplinary action. A promise or reward may not be made as an inducement to answer any questions.
(g) The formal interrogation of a law enforcement officer or correctional officer, including all recess periods, must be recorded on audio tape, or otherwise preserved in such a manner as to allow a transcript to be prepared, and there shall be no unrecorded questions or statements. Upon the request of the interrogated officer, a copy of any recording of the interrogation session must be made available to the interrogated officer no later than 72 hours, excluding holidays and weekends, following said interrogation.
(h) If the law enforcement officer or correctional officer under interrogation is under arrest, or is likely to be placed under arrest as a result of the interrogation, he or she shall be completely informed of all his or her rights before commencing the interrogation.
(i) At the request of any law enforcement officer or correctional officer under investigation, he or she has the right to be represented by counsel or any other representative of his or her choice, who shall be present at all times during the interrogation whenever the interrogation relates to the officer’s continued fitness for law enforcement or correctional service.
(j) Notwithstanding the rights and privileges provided by this part, this part does not limit the right of an agency to discipline or to pursue criminal charges against an officer.
(2) COMPLAINT REVIEW BOARDS.—A complaint review board shall be composed of three members: One member selected by the chief administrator of the agency or unit; one member selected by the aggrieved officer; and a third member to be selected by the other two members. Agencies or units having more than 100 law enforcement officers or correctional officers shall utilize a five-member board, with two members being selected by the administrator, two members being selected by the aggrieved officer, and the fifth member being selected by the other four members. The board members shall be law enforcement officers or correctional officers selected from any state, county, or municipal agency within the county. There shall be a board for law enforcement officers and a board for correctional officers whose members shall be from the same discipline as the aggrieved officer. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to sheriffs or deputy sheriffs.
(3) CIVIL SUITS BROUGHT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OR CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS.—Every law enforcement officer or correctional officer shall have the right to bring civil suit against any person, group of persons, or organization or corporation, or the head of such organization or corporation, for damages, either pecuniary or otherwise, suffered during the performance of the officer’s official duties, for abridgment of the officer’s civil rights arising out of the officer’s performance of official duties, or for filing a complaint against the officer which the person knew was false when it was filed. This section does not establish a separate civil action against the officer’s employing law enforcement agency for the investigation and processing of a complaint filed under this part.
(4) NOTICE OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION; COPY OF AND OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS CONTENTS OF INVESTIGATIVE FILE; CONFIDENTIALITY.—
(a) A dismissal, demotion, transfer, reassignment, or other personnel action that might result in loss of pay or benefits or that might otherwise be considered a punitive measure may not be taken against any law enforcement officer or correctional officer unless the law enforcement officer or correctional officer is notified of the action and the reason or reasons for the action before the effective date of the action.
(b) Notwithstanding s. 112.533(5), whenever a law enforcement officer or correctional officer is subject to disciplinary action consisting of suspension with loss of pay, demotion, or dismissal, the officer or the officer’s representative must, upon request, be provided with a complete copy of the investigative file, including the final investigative report and all evidence, and with the opportunity to address the findings in the report with the employing law enforcement agency before imposing disciplinary action consisting of suspension with loss of pay, demotion, or dismissal. The contents of the complaint and investigation must remain confidential until such time as the employing law enforcement agency makes a final determination whether to issue a notice of disciplinary action consisting of suspension with loss of pay, demotion, or dismissal. This paragraph does not provide law enforcement officers with a property interest or expectancy of continued employment, employment, or appointment as a law enforcement officer.
(5) RETALIATION FOR EXERCISING RIGHTS.—No law enforcement officer or correctional officer shall be discharged; disciplined; demoted; denied promotion, transfer, or reassignment; or otherwise discriminated against in regard to his or her employment or appointment, or be threatened with any such treatment, by reason of his or her exercise of the rights granted by this part.
(6) LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS.—
(a) Except as provided in this subsection, disciplinary action, suspension, demotion, or dismissal may not be undertaken by an agency against a law enforcement officer or correctional officer for any act, omission, or other allegation or complaint of misconduct, regardless of the origin of the allegation or complaint, if the investigation of the allegation or complaint is not completed within 180 days after the date the agency receives notice of the allegation or complaint by a person authorized by the agency to initiate an investigation of the misconduct. If the agency determines that disciplinary action is appropriate, it shall complete its investigation and give notice in writing to the law enforcement officer or correctional officer of its intent to proceed with disciplinary action, along with a proposal of the specific action sought, including length of suspension, if applicable. Notice to the officer must be provided within 180 days after the date the agency received notice of the alleged misconduct, regardless of the origin of the allegation or complaint, except as follows:
1. The running of the limitations period may be tolled for a period specified in a written waiver of the limitation by the law enforcement officer or correctional officer.
2. The running of the limitations period is tolled during the time that any criminal investigation or prosecution is pending in connection with the act, omission, or other allegation of misconduct.
3. If the investigation involves an officer who is incapacitated or otherwise unavailable, the running of the limitations period is tolled during the period of incapacitation or unavailability.
4. In a multijurisdictional investigation, the limitations period may be extended for a period of time reasonably necessary to facilitate the coordination of the agencies involved.
5. The running of the limitations period may be tolled for emergencies or natural disasters during the time period wherein the Governor has declared a state of emergency within the jurisdictional boundaries of the concerned agency.
6. The running of the limitations period is tolled during the time that the officer’s compliance hearing proceeding is continuing beginning with the filing of the notice of violation and a request for a hearing and ending with the written determination of the compliance review panel or upon the violation being remedied by the agency.
(b) An investigation against a law enforcement officer or correctional officer may be reopened, notwithstanding the limitations period for commencing disciplinary action, demotion, or dismissal, if:
1. Significant new evidence has been discovered that is likely to affect the outcome of the investigation.
2. The evidence could not have reasonably been discovered in the normal course of investigation or the evidence resulted from the predisciplinary response of the officer.
Any disciplinary action resulting from an investigation that is reopened pursuant to this paragraph must be completed within 90 days after the date the investigation is reopened.
(7) RIGHTS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS RELATING TO A BRADY IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM.—
(a) A law enforcement officer or correctional officer has all of the rights specified in s. 112.536 relating to the inclusion of the name and information of the officer in a Brady identification system.
(b) A law enforcement officer or correctional officer may not be discharged, suspended, demoted, or otherwise disciplined, or threatened with discharge, suspension, demotion, or other discipline, by his or her employing agency solely as a result of a prosecuting agency determining that the officer’s name and information should be included in a Brady identification system. This paragraph does not prohibit an officer’s employing agency from discharging, suspending, demoting, or taking other disciplinary action against a law enforcement officer or correctional officer based on the underlying actions of the officer which resulted in his or her name being included in a Brady identification system. If a collective bargaining agreement applies, the actions taken by the officer’s employing agency must conform to the rules and procedures adopted by the collective bargaining agreement.
History.—s. 2, ch. 74-274; s. 2, ch. 82-156; s. 2, ch. 93-19; s. 721, ch. 95-147; s. 1, ch. 98-249; s. 1, ch. 2000-184; s. 1, ch. 2003-149; s. 3, ch. 2005-100; s. 1, ch. 2007-110; s. 1, ch. 2009-200; s. 3, ch. 2020-104; s. 2, ch. 2023-230; s. 3, ch. 2024-86.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 56
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: McQuade v. Florida Dep't of Corr., 51 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
McQuade v. Florida Dep't of Corr., 51 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). “Nothing in the Migliore opinion indicates that section 112.532, Florida Statutes applies only in situations where members of the public file complaints against employed law enforcement or correctional officers, and not to investigations initiated by an incident report from…”
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). “Under our interpretation of the purpose of Section 112.532 et seq., appellants would have been entitled to a hearing on the basis of the original written complaint against them.”
D'Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017). “See § 112.532, Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, by passing the PBR and devoting an elaborate section of it to regulating these interrogations and conferring many rights upon officers, it is plain that, in part, the objective of the PBR is to protect the officers to a degree from certain…”
Kamenesh v. City of Miami, 772 F. Supp. 583 (S.D. Fla. 1991). “Because questions of fact remain concerning the adequacy of notice of allegedly punitive actions against Kamenesh and whether the Defendants fulfilled the statute’s procedural requirements when conducting investigations of Plaintiff, Count II must survive Defendants’ summary…”
Kelly v. Gill, 544 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). “" Section 112.532(1) deals with rights of officers while under investigation as the result of an outside complainant.”
City of Lauderhill v. Rhames, 864 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). “They also claimed a violation of the Florida Police Officers' Bill of Rights, section 112.532(4), Florida Statutes (1995).”
Mesa v. Rodriguez, 357 So. 2d 711 (Fla. 1978). “His complaint could have been reviewed by a Complaint Review Board composed as required by Section 112.532(2), Florida Statutes. [7] And, the board, after a hearing, would have had authority to render an advisory recommendation as to action to be taken against Officer Mesa.”
City of Miami v. Cosgrove, 516 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). “We conclude that the exclusive remedy for noncompliance with Section 112.532, Florida Statutes (1983), is injunctive relief as provided in Section 112.”
Gray v. Rodriguez, 481 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). “F.S. 112.532 was enacted to provide a means for Police Officers to recover damages and also to provide them with a system comporting with due process for ".”
Bailey v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs, 659 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). “Pertinent to the present appeal, with regard to Bailey's attempt to state a cause of action in Counts VII and VIII based on section 112.532, Florida Statutes, the Police *301 Officers' Bill of Rights, the district court stated: It provides certain protections to officers under…”
Donald F. Buxton v. City of Plant City, 871 F.2d 1037 (11th Cir. 1989). “Count II alleged a pendent state claim based on violations of Florida’s Policeman’s Bill of Rights, Fla. Stat. § 112.532 (1982). Count III alleged a pendent state claim of defamation.”
112.532(1): 9 cases
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
D'Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017). “See § 112.532, Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, by passing the PBR and devoting an elaborate section of it to regulating these interrogations and conferring many rights upon officers, it is plain that, in part, the objective of the PBR is to protect the officers to a degree from certain…”
Grice v. City of Kissimmee, 697 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).
Kelly v. Gill, 544 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). “" Section 112.532(1) deals with rights of officers while under investigation as the result of an outside complainant.”
Smith v. Town of Golden Beach, 403 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
112.532(1)(a): 1 case
Ujcic v. City of Apopka, 581 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).
112.532(1)(c): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(1)(d): 2 cases
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
Fraternal Order of Police, Gator v. City of Gainesville, 148 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
112.532(1)(g): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(1)(h): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(2): 13 cases
McQuade v. Florida Dep't of Corr., 51 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). “Nothing in the Migliore opinion indicates that section 112.532, Florida Statutes applies only in situations where members of the public file complaints against employed law enforcement or correctional officers, and not to investigations initiated by an incident report from…”
Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). “Under our interpretation of the purpose of Section 112.532 et seq., appellants would have been entitled to a hearing on the basis of the original written complaint against them.”
Ragucci v. City of Plantation, 407 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).
City of Hallandale v. Inglima, 346 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 431 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1983).
112.532(3): 12 cases
Mesa v. Rodriguez, 357 So. 2d 711 (Fla. 1978). “His complaint could have been reviewed by a Complaint Review Board composed as required by Section 112.532(2), Florida Statutes. [7] And, the board, after a hearing, would have had authority to render an advisory recommendation as to action to be taken against Officer Mesa.”
Kamenesh v. City of Miami, 772 F. Supp. 583 (S.D. Fla. 1991). “Because questions of fact remain concerning the adequacy of notice of allegedly punitive actions against Kamenesh and whether the Defendants fulfilled the statute’s procedural requirements when conducting investigations of Plaintiff, Count II must survive Defendants’ summary…”
City of Miami v. Cosgrove, 516 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). “We conclude that the exclusive remedy for noncompliance with Section 112.532, Florida Statutes (1983), is injunctive relief as provided in Section 112.”
McQuade v. Florida Dep't of Corr., 51 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). “Nothing in the Migliore opinion indicates that section 112.532, Florida Statutes applies only in situations where members of the public file complaints against employed law enforcement or correctional officers, and not to investigations initiated by an incident report from…”
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(3)(1983): 1 case
Gray v. Rodriguez, 481 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). “F.S. 112.532 was enacted to provide a means for Police Officers to recover damages and also to provide them with a system comporting with due process for ".”
112.532(4): 10 cases
City of Lauderhill v. Rhames, 864 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). “They also claimed a violation of the Florida Police Officers' Bill of Rights, section 112.532(4), Florida Statutes (1995).”
Kelly v. Gill, 544 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). “" Section 112.532(1) deals with rights of officers while under investigation as the result of an outside complainant.”
Barton v. City of Eustis, Fla., 415 F. Supp. 1355 (M.D. Fla. 1976).
Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). “Under our interpretation of the purpose of Section 112.532 et seq., appellants would have been entitled to a hearing on the basis of the original written complaint against them.”
City of Hallandale v. Inglima, 346 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
112.532(4)(a): 3 cases
D'Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017). “See § 112.532, Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, by passing the PBR and devoting an elaborate section of it to regulating these interrogations and conferring many rights upon officers, it is plain that, in part, the objective of the PBR is to protect the officers to a degree from certain…”
Raynor v. Florida State Lodge, 987 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Dade Cnty. Police Benevolent Assoc., 154 So. 3d 373 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
112.532(4)(b): 2 cases
Fraternal Order of Police v. Rutherford, 51 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Fraternal Order of Police, Gator v. City of Gainesville, 148 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
112.532(5): 4 cases
Kamenesh v. City of Miami, 772 F. Supp. 583 (S.D. Fla. 1991). “Because questions of fact remain concerning the adequacy of notice of allegedly punitive actions against Kamenesh and whether the Defendants fulfilled the statute’s procedural requirements when conducting investigations of Plaintiff, Count II must survive Defendants’ summary…”
D'Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017). “See § 112.532, Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, by passing the PBR and devoting an elaborate section of it to regulating these interrogations and conferring many rights upon officers, it is plain that, in part, the objective of the PBR is to protect the officers to a degree from certain…”
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Dade Cnty. Police Benevolent Assoc., 154 So. 3d 373 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
Bembanaste v. City of Hollywood, 394 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).
112.532(6): 5 cases
McQuade v. Florida Dep't of Corr., 51 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). “Nothing in the Migliore opinion indicates that section 112.532, Florida Statutes applies only in situations where members of the public file complaints against employed law enforcement or correctional officers, and not to investigations initiated by an incident report from…”
D'Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017). “See § 112.532, Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, by passing the PBR and devoting an elaborate section of it to regulating these interrogations and conferring many rights upon officers, it is plain that, in part, the objective of the PBR is to protect the officers to a degree from certain…”
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Dade Cnty. Police Benevolent Assoc., 154 So. 3d 373 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
Russell v. Florida Dep't of Corr., No. 1D2024-2730 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 26, 2025).
112.532(6)(a): 4 cases
McQuade v. Florida Dep't of Corr., 51 So. 3d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). “Nothing in the Migliore opinion indicates that section 112.532, Florida Statutes applies only in situations where members of the public file complaints against employed law enforcement or correctional officers, and not to investigations initiated by an incident report from…”
Avila v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 29 So. 3d 401 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).
Fraternal Order of Police, Gator v. City of Gainesville, 148 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
Russell v. Florida Dep't of Corr., No. 1D2024-2730 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 26, 2025).
112.532(6)(a)(2): 2 cases
Avila v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 29 So. 3d 401 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).
Nesbitt v. Miami-Dade Cnty., No. 1:23-cv-20345 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 3, 2024).
112.532(6)(b): 2 cases
D'Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017). “See § 112.532, Fla. Stat. (2008). Thus, by passing the PBR and devoting an elaborate section of it to regulating these interrogations and conferring many rights upon officers, it is plain that, in part, the objective of the PBR is to protect the officers to a degree from certain…”
Fraternal Order of Police, Gator v. City of Gainesville, 148 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
112.532(d): 1 case
Ortiz v. City of Miami, No. 1:20-cv-25132 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 3, 2021).
112.532(f): 1 case
Venero v. City of Tampa, Fla., 830 F. Supp. 1457 (M.D. Fla. 1993).
112.532(l): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(l)(a): 2 cases
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Dade Cnty. Police Benevolent Assoc., 154 So. 3d 373 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
Fraternal Order of Police, Gator v. City of Gainesville, 148 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
112.532(l)(c): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(l)(d): 2 cases
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
Fraternal Order of Police, Gator v. City of Gainesville, 148 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
112.532(l)(g): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(l)(h): 1 case
D'agastino v. City of Miami, 189 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “Section 112.532 identifies the rights granted to law enforcement and correctional officers while under investigation, and begins with the following preamble.”
112.532(l)(i): 1 case
United States v. Camacho, 739 F. Supp. 1504 (S.D. Fla. 1990).
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.