776.051
Use or threatened use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
776.051 Use or threatened use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.—
(1) A person is not justified in the use or threatened use of force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer.
(2) A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, is not justified in the use of force if the arrest or execution of a legal duty is unlawful and known by him or her to be unlawful.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1192, ch. 97-102; s. 1, ch. 2008-67; s. 8, ch. 2014-195.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 105
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Polite v. State
Polite v. State (2007)
“The State's argument rests on section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes (2002), a provision in the chapter concerning the justifiable use of force.”
Ivester v. State (1981)
“The motion to compel discovery was denied on the ground that a self-defense argument was "irrelevant and immaterial," because Section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes (1974), does not permit the use of force in resisting arrest.”
In Re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report No. 2009-01 (2010)
“6(g), Justifiable Use of Non-deadly Force, to conform with statutory changes brought about by the Legislature’s amendment to section 776.051, Florida Statutes (2008).”
Tillman v. State (2002)
“01 must be read in pari materia with section 776.051; the end result being that the *109 use of force in resisting an arrest by a person reasonably known to be a law enforcement officer is unlawful notwithstanding the technical illegality of the arrest.”
Taylor v. State (1999)
“In support of this argument, the state relies on section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes, which states that "[a] person is not justified in the use of force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer.”
In Re Standard Jury Inst. in Crim. Cases No. 2007-03 (2008)
“§ 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known to be, or reasonably appears to be a law enforcement officer.”
State v. Roy (2006)
“Since both acts occurred after the *407 officer told the defendant he was under arrest, section 776.051 applies and prohibits the defendant from using violence to resist the arrest, even if the arrest was illegal.”
In Re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES—REPORT NO. 2013-07 (2014)
“1, Resisting Officer with Violence, which currently provides: “A special instruction incorporating § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. should be given when the defense claims the officer was acting unlawfully.”
State v. Saunders (1976)
“74-383 § 13, Laws of Florida, now codified as Section 776.051 and effective July 1, 1975.”
Smiley v. State (2007)
“1985) (discussing that the new jury instruction for the justifiable use of force in resisting arrest under section 776.051(c), Florida Statutes (1985), was of a "substantive nature") (quoting committee report).”
The Florida Bar Re: Standard Jury Instructions Criminal Cases (1985)
“Force in resisting A person is not justified in using force arrest to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known, or reasonably appears to be F.S. 776.051(1) and a law enforcement officer.”
In Re Jury Inst. in Cr. Cases (No. 2005-4) (2006)
“§ 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known to be, or reasonably appears to be a law enforcement officer.”
— 776.051(1) — 71 cases
Polite v. State (2007)
“The State's argument rests on section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes (2002), a provision in the chapter concerning the justifiable use of force.”
Ivester v. State (1981)
“The motion to compel discovery was denied on the ground that a self-defense argument was "irrelevant and immaterial," because Section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes (1974), does not permit the use of force in resisting arrest.”
Taylor v. State (1999)
“In support of this argument, the state relies on section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes, which states that "[a] person is not justified in the use of force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer.”
Tillman v. State (2002)
“01 must be read in pari materia with section 776.051; the end result being that the *109 use of force in resisting an arrest by a person reasonably known to be a law enforcement officer is unlawful notwithstanding the technical illegality of the arrest.”
In Re Standard Jury Inst. in Crim. Cases No. 2007-03 (2008)
“§ 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known to be, or reasonably appears to be a law enforcement officer.”
— 776.051(2) — 4 cases
In Re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report No. 2009-01 (2010)
“6(g), Justifiable Use of Non-deadly Force, to conform with statutory changes brought about by the Legislature’s amendment to section 776.051, Florida Statutes (2008).”
Pani v. State (1978)
— 776.051(c) — 1 case
Smiley v. State (2007)
“1985) (discussing that the new jury instruction for the justifiable use of force in resisting arrest under section 776.051(c), Florida Statutes (1985), was of a "substantive nature") (quoting committee report).”
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.