Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 125.69 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 125.69 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 125.69 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 125.69

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
Chapter 125
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 125.69
125.69 Penalties; enforcement by code inspectors.
(1) Violations of county ordinances shall be prosecuted in the same manner as misdemeanors are prosecuted. Such violations shall be prosecuted in the name of the state in a court having jurisdiction of misdemeanors by the prosecuting attorney thereof and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500 or by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 60 days or by both such fine and imprisonment. However, a county may specify, by ordinance, a violation of a county ordinance which is punishable by a fine in an amount exceeding $500, but not exceeding $2,000 a day, if the county must have authority to punish a violation of that ordinance by a fine in an amount greater than $500 in order for the county to carry out a federally mandated program. A county may also specify, by ordinance, that a violation of any provision of a county ordinance imposing standards of conduct and disclosure requirements as provided in s. 112.326 is punishable by a fine not to exceed $1,000 or a term of imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 1 year.
(2) Each county is authorized and required to pay any attorney appointed by the court to represent a defendant charged with a criminal violation of a special law or county ordinance not ancillary to a state charge if the defendant is indigent and otherwise entitled to court-appointed counsel under the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of Florida. In these cases, the court shall appoint counsel to represent the defendant in accordance with s. 27.40, and shall order the county to pay the reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and related expenses of the defense. The county may contract with the public defender or the office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel for the judicial circuit in which the county is located to serve as court-appointed counsel pursuant to s. 27.54.
(3) If the county is the prevailing party, the county may recover the court fees and costs paid by it and the fees and expenses paid to court-appointed counsel as part of its judgment. The state shall bear no expense of actions brought under this section except those that it would bear in an ordinary civil action between private parties in county court.
(4)(a) The board of county commissioners of each county may designate its agents or employees as code inspectors whose duty it is to assure code compliance. Any person designated as a code inspector may issue citations for violations of county codes and ordinances, respectively, or subsequent amendments thereto, when such code inspector has actual knowledge that a violation has been committed.
(b) A person designated as a code inspector may not initiate an investigation of a potential violation of a duly enacted code or ordinance by way of an anonymous complaint. A person who reports a potential violation of a code or an ordinance must provide his or her name and address to the governing body of the respective board of county commissioners before an investigation occurs. This paragraph does not apply if the person designated as a code inspector has reason to believe that the violation presents an imminent threat to public health, safety, or welfare or imminent destruction of habitat or sensitive resources.
(c) Prior to issuing a citation, a code inspector shall provide notice to the violator that the violator has committed a violation of a code or ordinance and shall establish a reasonable time period within which the violator must correct the violation. Such time period shall be no more than 30 days. If, upon personal investigation, a code inspector finds that the violator has not corrected the violation within the time period, a code inspector may issue a citation to the violator. A code inspector does not have to provide the violator with a reasonable time period to correct the violation prior to issuing a citation and may immediately issue a citation if the code inspector has reason to believe that the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, or if the violation is irreparable or irreversible.
(d) A citation issued by a code inspector shall state the date and time of issuance, name and address of the person in violation, date of the violation, section of the codes or ordinances, or subsequent amendments thereto, violated, name of the code inspector, and date and time when the violator shall appear in county court.
(e) If a repeat violation is found subsequent to the issuance of a citation, the code inspector is not required to give the violator a reasonable time to correct the violation and may immediately issue a citation. For purposes of this subsection, the term “repeat violation” means a violation of a provision of a code or ordinance by a person who has previously been found to have violated the same provision within 5 years prior to the violation, notwithstanding the violations occurred at different locations.
(f) If the owner of property which is subject to an enforcement proceeding before county court transfers ownership of such property between the time the initial citation or citations are issued and the date the violator has been summoned to appear in county court, such owner shall:
1. Disclose, in writing, the existence and the nature of the proceeding to the prospective transferee.
2. Deliver to the prospective transferee a copy of the pleadings, notices, and other materials relating to the county court proceeding received by the transferor.
3. Disclose, in writing, to the prospective transferee that the new owner will be responsible for compliance with the applicable code and with orders issued in the county court proceeding.
4. File a notice with the code enforcement official of the transfer of the property, with the identity and address of the new owner and copies of the disclosures made to the new owner, within 5 days after the date of the transfer.

A failure to make the disclosure described in subparagraphs 1., 2., and 3. before the transfer creates a rebuttable presumption of fraud. If the property is transferred before the date the violator has been summoned to appear in county court, the proceeding shall not be dismissed but the new owner will be substituted as the party of record and thereafter provided a reasonable period of time to correct the violation before the continuation of proceedings in county court.

(g) If the code inspector has reason to believe a violation or the condition causing the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare or if the violation is irreparable or irreversible in nature, or if after attempts under this section to bring a repeat violation into compliance with a provision of a code or ordinance prove unsuccessful, the local governing body may make all reasonable repairs which are required to bring the property into compliance and charge the owner with the reasonable cost of the repairs along with the fine imposed pursuant to this section. Making such repairs does not create a continuing obligation on the part of the local governing body to make further repairs or to maintain the property and does not create any liability against the local governing body for any damages to the property if such repairs were completed in good faith.
(h) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize any person designated as a code inspector to perform any function or duties of a law enforcement officer other than as specified in this subsection. A code inspector shall not make physical arrests or take any person into custody and shall be exempt from requirements relating to the Special Risk Class of the Florida Retirement System, bonding, and the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, as defined and provided by general law.
(i) The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the enforcement pursuant to ss. 553.79 and 553.80 of the Florida Building Code adopted pursuant to s. 553.73 as applied to construction, provided that a building permit is either not required or has been issued by the county.
(j) The provisions of this subsection may be used by a county in lieu of the provisions of part II of chapter 162.
(k) The provisions of this subsection are additional or supplemental means of enforcing county codes and ordinances. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (j), nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a county from enforcing its codes or ordinances by any other means.
History.s. 3, ch. 69-234; ss. 1, 2, ch. 70-452; s. 1, ch. 79-379; s. 12, ch. 89-268; s. 1, ch. 90-37; s. 1, ch. 98-287; s. 1, ch. 99-360; s. 113, ch. 2000-141; s. 35, ch. 2001-186; s. 4, ch. 2001-372; s. 80, ch. 2003-402; s. 52, ch. 2004-265; s. 26, ch. 2007-62; s. 1, ch. 2010-112; s. 1, ch. 2021-167.

F.S. 125.69 on Google Scholar

F.S. 125.69 on CourtListener

Amendments to 125.69


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 125.69

Total Results: 22

Kim D. Lee v. Luis Ferraro

284 F.3d 1188, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 3438, 2002 WL 340670

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 5, 2002 | Docket: 369466

Cited 1232 times | Published

crime. See generally Fla. Stat. Ann. § 125.69(1) (stating that violations of county ordinances

Joseph Richard Redner v. Charles S. Dean, Sheriff of Citrus County, Florida, Robert A. Butterworth

29 F.3d 1495, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23252, 1994 WL 419484

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 26, 1994 | Docket: 167120

Cited 72 times | Published

may be prosecuted and punished as provided by Section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1985). SECTION 6

Movie & Video World, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners

723 F. Supp. 695, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12310, 1989 WL 120556

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1989 | Docket: 1197703

Cited 25 times | Published

Ordinance shall be punished as provided in Section 125.69, Florida Statutes, or its successor. Each day

Phantom of Clearwater v. Pinellas County

894 So. 2d 1011, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 184, 30 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 205

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 14, 2005 | Docket: 1768416

Cited 22 times | Published

and prosecution pursuant to Florida Statutes, § 125.69. These sanctions are in addition to any criminal

State v. Wise

603 So. 2d 61, 1992 WL 174154

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 1992 | Docket: 1475859

Cited 10 times | Published

reported misdemeanors as well as felonies. See § 125.69(1), Fla. Stat. (1991). Thus, the deputy was statutorily

Davis v. State

928 So. 2d 442, 2006 WL 1144464

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 2006 | Docket: 1405989

Cited 7 times | Published

this case. See Freeman, 761 So.2d at 1071. Section 125.69(1), Florida Statutes (2001), provides that

PP v. State

466 So. 2d 1140, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 849

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1985 | Docket: 1524967

Cited 6 times | Published

Metropolitan Dade County [made a misdemeanor by § 125.69, Fla. Stat.(1983)], which provides as follows:

Blue Moon Enterprises, Inc. v. Pinellas County Department of Consumer Protection

97 F. Supp. 2d 1134, 28 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1865, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6572

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 10, 2000 | Docket: 2209763

Cited 5 times | Published

and punished as provided by Florida Statutes section 125.69 (1990).[2] *1138 Plaintiffs operate their adult

State v. Smith

584 So. 2d 145, 1991 WL 150412

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 1991 | Docket: 466692

Cited 4 times | Published

declared this offense punishable pursuant to section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1987), i.e., as a misdemeanor

Jorgenson v. County of Volusia

625 F. Supp. 1543, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30265

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 1986 | Docket: 2147422

Cited 3 times | Published

county jail no *1545 longer than 60 days or both. § 125.69, Fla.Stat. (1985). Section 9 provides for the

Katina Paese v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 2024 | Docket: 68290564

Published

inspector is not a law enforcement officer. See § 125.69(4)(f), Fla. Stat. (2020) (“Nothing in this subsection

Bateman v. State

240 So. 3d 36

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2017 | Docket: 6244881

Published

exploitation of official position in violation of section 125.69, Florida Statutes, (2013), and Miami-Dade

Jensen v. Pinellas County

198 So. 3d 754, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 2864, 2016 WL 746442

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2016 | Docket: 3039678

Published

such a fíne and imprisonment as provided in F.S. § 125.069, as it may be amended. (Ord. No. 99-6, §

AURA NIGHTCLUB v. Orange County

166 F. Supp. 2d 1358, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22615, 2001 WL 1328520

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 2001 | Docket: 2293450

Published

section 1-9 of this code and Section 125.69 of Florida Statutes." Section 125.69(1) of Florida Statutes states:

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Apr 6, 1995 | Docket: 3256135

Published

is concern, however, that the requirement in section 125.69(1), Florida Statutes, that violations of county

Nesmith v. State

608 So. 2d 96, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11305, 1992 WL 312749

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 28, 1992 | Docket: 64691779

Published

remanded. LEHAN, C.J., and RYDER, J., concur. . § 125.69, Fla.Stat. (1985).

P.P. v. State

466 So. 2d 1140, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 849, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13105

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1985 | Docket: 64611157

Published

Metropolitan Dade County [made a misdemeanor by § 125.69, Fla.Stat.(1983) ], which provides as follows:

State v. Reed

448 So. 2d 1102, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12493

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 1984 | Docket: 64604297

Published

carrying a penalty for a misdemeanor under section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1977)); City of Tampa v

State v. Stevens

421 So. 2d 41, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21515

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 1982 | Docket: 64592931

Published

punishable as a misdemean- or pursuant to Section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1979). Alexander v. State

Alexander v. State

418 So. 2d 432, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 20987

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 1982 | Docket: 64591803

Published

furnishes false information; or Pursuant to Section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1979), violation of an ordinance

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Dec 18, 1979 | Docket: 3255448

Published

prosecuted and punished as provided by law. Section 125.69, F. S., as amended by Ch. 79-379, Laws of Florida

State v. LaValley

362 So. 2d 303, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15961

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 14, 1978 | Docket: 64565950

Published

sentence of imprisonment for which is 60 days. Section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1977).1 The Supreme Court