Florida Statute 775.27 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES

Chapter 775
GENERAL PENALTIES; REGISTRATION OF CRIMINALS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 775.027

775.027 Insanity defense.—

(1) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.—All persons are presumed to be sane. It is an affirmative defense to a criminal prosecution that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant was insane. Insanity is established when:

(a) The defendant had a mental infirmity, disease, or defect; and

(b) Because of this condition, the defendant:

1. Did not know what he or she was doing or its consequences; or

2. Although the defendant knew what he or she was doing and its consequences, the defendant did not know that what he or she was doing was wrong.

Mental infirmity, disease, or defect does not constitute a defense of insanity except as provided in this subsection.

(2) BURDEN OF PROOF.—The defendant has the burden of proving the defense of insanity by clear and convincing evidence.

History.—s. 1, ch. 2000-315.

F.S. 775.027 on Google Scholar

F.S. 775.027 on CourtListener

Amendments to 775.027

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 775.027

Total Results: 15

Coday v. State

946 So. 2d 988, 2006 WL 3028248

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 2006 | Docket: 1771455

Cited 51 times | Published

know that what he or she was doing was wrong. § 775.027, Fla. Stat. (2005). [5] Because we are vacating

Del Valle v. State

80 So. 3d 999, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 732, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 2878, 2011 WL 6220783

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 15, 2011 | Docket: 1935006

Cited 33 times | Published

burden when attempting to prove that defense. See § 775.027, Fla. Stat. (2011) (“The defendant has the burden

Brown v. State

994 So. 2d 480, 2008 WL 4809898

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 2008 | Docket: 1218776

Cited 5 times | Published

that what he or she was doing was wrong. . . . § 775.027(1), Fla. Stat. (2006) (emphasis added). See also

Hernandez v. State

117 So. 3d 778, 2013 WL 1136434, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 4431

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 2013 | Docket: 60232779

Cited 4 times | Published

understanding that his actions were morally wrong. § 775.027(1), Fla. Stat. (2004).

Wimberly v. State

118 So. 3d 816, 2012 WL 1859198, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8256

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 23, 2012 | Docket: 60233433

Cited 3 times | Published

unconstitutional, as applied to juveniles, section 775.027, Florida Statutes (2008), which defines the

In Re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (No. 2005-5).

939 So. 2d 1052, 31 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 607, 2006 Fla. LEXIS 2260, 2006 WL 2771525

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 2006 | Docket: 1657438

Cited 3 times | Published

Laws of Fla. In 2000, the Legislature enacted section 775.027, Florida Statutes, which became law on June

Harriman v. State

174 So. 3d 1044, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 12651, 2015 WL 4999013

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 2015 | Docket: 60250254

Cited 2 times | Published

burden of proof on affirmative defenses. See § 775.027(2), Fla. Stat. (2014) ("The defendant has the

Cotto v. State

89 So. 3d 1025, 2012 WL 1934438, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8621

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 30, 2012 | Docket: 60308484

Cited 2 times | Published

defense of insanity, and which is codified in section 775.027, Florida Statutes (2005). . This Court takes

Rodriguez v. State

172 So. 3d 540, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 12032, 2015 WL 4769380

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 2015 | Docket: 60250089

Cited 1 times | Published

2000, the M’Naghten Rule was codified in section 775.027, Florida Statutes, which provides: (1) AFFIRMATIVE

Gilbert Dudley, III v. State of Florida

139 So. 3d 273, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 335, 2014 WL 1923782, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 1625

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 15, 2014 | Docket: 57382

Cited 1 times | Published

insanity except as provided in this subsection. § 775.027, Fla. Stat. (2013). By contrast, the term “mentally

Reynolds v. State of Florida and Department of Children and Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 2, 2024 | Docket: 68496570

Published

All individuals are presumed sane. See § 775.027(1), Fla. Stat. As a result, insanity is an affirmative

Damion Hayes v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 25, 2021 | Docket: 60292673

Published

insanity defense in criminal cases. See Fla. Stat. § 775.027. This statute essentially codified Florida’s

KENNETH PEREZ v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 2018 | Docket: 7913118

Published

does not result in insanity, as defined by section 775.027, Florida Statutes (2013), is not a defense

State v. Anthony M. Jackson

204 So. 3d 958, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17109

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2016 | Docket: 4540781

Published

to not understand that the conduct was wrong, § 775.027, Fla, Stat. (2007). 10 . At trial

State v. Rogers

955 So. 2d 1213, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 7116, 2007 WL 1342467

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2007 | Docket: 64850567

Published

impairs the state’s ability to prosecute. Under section 775.027(2), Florida Statutes (2000), the burden of