Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 321.25 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 321.25 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 321.25

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXIII
MOTOR VEHICLES
Chapter 321
HIGHWAY PATROL
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 321.25
321.25 Training provided at patrol schools.The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles is authorized to provide for the training of law enforcement officials and individuals in matters relating to the duties, functions, and powers of the Florida Highway Patrol in the schools established by the department for the training of highway patrol candidates and officers. The Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles is authorized to charge a fee for providing the training authorized by this section. The fee shall be charged to persons attending the training. The fee shall be based on the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ costs for providing the training, and such costs may include, but are not limited to, tuition, lodging, and meals. Revenues from the fees shall be used to offset the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles’ costs for providing the training. The cost of training local enforcement officers shall be paid for by their respective offices, counties or municipalities, as the case may be. Such cost shall be deemed a proper county or municipal expense or a proper expenditure of the office of sheriff.
History.s. 1, ch. 57-292; ss. 24, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 30, ch. 95-333.

F.S. 321.25 on Google Scholar

F.S. 321.25 on Casetext

Amendments to 321.25


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 321.25
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 321.25.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 321.25

Total Results: 9

Rigterink v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2011-06-16T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 66 So. 3d 866, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 273, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 1343, 2011 WL 2374188

Snippet: (Fla.2007), and Schwab v. State, 969 So.2d 318, 321-25 (Fla.2007). Rigterink has not presented any additional

Marek v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2009-05-08T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 8 So. 3d 1123, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 325, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 745, 2009 WL 1259356

Snippet: 1089 (Fla.2008); Schwab v. State, 969 So.2d 318, 321-25 (Fla.2007), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct

Rigterink v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2009-01-30T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 2 So. 3d 221, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 132, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 151, 2009 WL 217966

Snippet: -53 (Fla.2007); Schwab v. State, 969 So.2d 318, 321-25 (Fla.2007) (upholding Florida's current lethal-injection

Ventura v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2009-01-29T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 2 So. 3d 194, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 71, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 131, 2009 WL 196379

Snippet: Lightbourne, 969 So.2d at 349-53; Schwab, 969 So.2d at 321-25. As we stated in Schwab, "Given the record

Walton v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2009-01-29T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 3 So. 3d 1000, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 89, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 136, 2009 WL 196320

Snippet: .2d 777 (2008); Schwab v. State, 969 So.2d 318, 321-25 (Fla.2007), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct

Moore v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2000-06-22T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 761 So. 2d 321, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 498, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1268, 2000 WL 796080

Snippet: Pariente, Quince, Shaw, Wells 22 June 2000 761 So. 2d 321, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 498, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1268,

Smith Bros. Inc. v. Williams

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1930-02-18T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 126 So. 367, 100 Fla. 642

Snippet: 249; 22 Fed.R. 2d 681; 172 U.S. 416; 6 R. C. L. 321; 25 R. C. L. 94; Munroe v. Reeves, 71 Fla. 612, 71

Butler v. Ederheimer

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1908-01-15T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 55 Fla. 544

Snippet: returned to *554us a shipment of goods amounting to $321.25, but this shipment we declined to receive and have…return, that is the bill of goods amounting to $321.25, of which I have just testified that we would not

Danford v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1907-01-15T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 53 Fla. 4

Snippet: 465, 2 Pac. Rep. 609; People v. Quick, 58 Mich. 321, 25 N. W. Rep. 302; People v. Ah Len, 92 Cal. 282,