775.32

Use of military-type training provided by a designated foreign terrorist organization.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
775.32 Use of military-type training provided by a designated foreign terrorist organization.
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Critical infrastructure facility” has the same meaning as provided in s. 493.631.
(b) “Designated foreign terrorist organization” means an organization designated as a terrorist organization under s. 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
(c) “Military-type training” means training:
1. In means or methods that can:
a. Cause the death of, or serious bodily injury to, another person;
b. Destroy or damage property; or
c. Disrupt services to a critical infrastructure facility; or
2. On the use, storage, production, or assembly of an explosive, a firearm, or any other weapon, including a weapon of mass destruction.
(d) “Serious bodily injury” has the same meaning as provided in s. 775.30(3).
(e) “Weapon of mass destruction” has the same meaning as provided in s. 790.166.
(2) A person who has received military-type training from a designated foreign terrorist organization may not use, attempt to use, or conspire to use such military-type training with the intent to unlawfully harm another person or damage a critical infrastructure facility.
(3) A person who commits a violation of subsection (2) commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(4) A person who commits a violation of subsection (2) which results in the death of, or serious bodily injury to, a person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
History.s. 3, ch. 2017-37.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2003–2003 · leading case: Espindola v. State
Espindola v. State (2003) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “See § 775.32(7)(a), Fla. Stat. [8] Broad immunity is afforded anyone acting in good faith in the implementation of FSPA's notification requirements.”
— 775.32(7)(a) — 1 case
Espindola v. State (2003) fladistctapp “See § 775.32(7)(a), Fla. Stat. [8] Broad immunity is afforded anyone acting in good faith in the implementation of FSPA's notification requirements.”
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.

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham Syfert, a Jacksonville, Florida criminal defense attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). Attorney Syfert regularly handles Chapter 775 matters in the context of felony sentencing and criminal defense and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.