Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 784.0487 (2025)
Violation of an injunction for protection against stalking or cyberstalking.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
784.0487 Violation of an injunction for protection against stalking or cyberstalking.—
(1) If the injunction for protection against stalking or cyberstalking has been violated and the respondent has not been arrested, the petitioner may contact the clerk of the circuit court of the county in which the violation is alleged to have occurred. The clerk shall assist the petitioner in preparing an affidavit in support of reporting the violation or directing the petitioner to the office operated by the court that has been designated by the chief judge of that circuit as the central intake point for violations of injunctions for protection where the petitioner can receive assistance in the preparation of the affidavit in support of the violation.
(2) The affidavit shall be immediately forwarded by the office assisting the petitioner to the state attorney of that circuit and to such judge as the chief judge determines to be the recipient of affidavits of violations of an injunction. If the affidavit alleges that a crime has been committed, the office assisting the petitioner shall also forward a copy of the petitioner’s affidavit to the appropriate law enforcement agency for investigation. No later than 20 days after receiving the initial report, the local law enforcement agency shall complete its investigation and forward a report to the state attorney. The policy adopted by the state attorney in each circuit under s. 741.2901(2) shall include a policy regarding intake of alleged violations of injunctions for protection against stalking or cyberstalking under this section. The intake shall be supervised by a state attorney who has been designated and assigned to handle stalking or cyberstalking cases. The state attorney shall determine within 30 working days whether his or her office will file criminal charges or prepare a motion for an order to show cause as to why the respondent should not be held in criminal contempt, or prepare both as alternative findings, or file notice that the case remains under investigation or is pending subject to some other action.
(3) If the court has knowledge that the petitioner or another person is in immediate danger if the court does not act before the decision of the state attorney to proceed, the court shall immediately issue an order of appointment of the state attorney to file a motion for an order to show cause as to why the respondent should not be held in contempt. If the court does not issue an order of appointment of the state attorney, it shall immediately notify the state attorney that the court is proceeding to enforce the violation through criminal contempt.
(4)(a) A person who willfully violates an injunction for protection against stalking or cyberstalking issued pursuant to s. 784.0485, or a foreign protection order accorded full faith and credit pursuant to s. 741.315, by:
1. Going to, or being within 500 feet of, the petitioner’s residence, school, place of employment, or a specified place frequented regularly by the petitioner and any named family members or individuals closely associated with the petitioner;
2. Committing an act of stalking against the petitioner;
3. Committing any other violation of the injunction through an intentional unlawful threat, word, or act to do violence to the petitioner;
4. Telephoning, contacting, or otherwise communicating with the petitioner, directly or indirectly, unless the injunction specifically allows indirect contact through a third party;
5. Knowingly and intentionally coming within 100 feet of the petitioner’s motor vehicle, whether or not that vehicle is occupied;
6. Defacing or destroying the petitioner’s personal property, including the petitioner’s motor vehicle; or
7. Refusing to surrender firearms or ammunition if ordered to do so by the court,
commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, except as provided in paragraph (b).
(b) A person who has two or more prior convictions for violation of an injunction or foreign protection order, and who subsequently commits a violation of any injunction or foreign protection order against the same victim, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “conviction” means a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea or a trial, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld or a plea of nolo contendere is entered.
(5) A person who suffers an injury or loss as a result of a violation of an injunction for protection against stalking or cyberstalking may be awarded economic damages for that injury or loss by the court issuing the injunction. Damages include costs and attorney fees for enforcement of the injunction.
Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 784.0487
M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJ WIN 500 FT PET RESID SCH OR EMPLOY
§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJ COMING WITHIN 100 FT PET MTR VEH
§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJ FAILURE TO SURRENDER FIREARM OR AMMO
§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJ DEFACE DESTROY PET PERS PROP
§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJ PHONING CONTACT COMMUNICATE WITH PET
§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJUNCTION STALKING
§784.0487(4a)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJ UNLAWFUL THREAT WORD OR ACT VIOLENCE
§784.0487(4b)CONTEMPT OF COURTRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8006
§784.0487(4b)CONTEMPT OF COURTVIOL INJUN STALK CYBERSTALK 2 OR MORE CONVICT
§784.0487(4c)CONTEMPT OF COURTRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8007
§784.0487(4d)CONTEMPT OF COURTRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8008
§784.0487(4e)CONTEMPT OF COURTRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8009
§784.0487(4f)CONTEMPT OF COURTRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8010
§784.0487(4g)CONTEMPT OF COURTRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8011
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: Christopher Leon Jacobs v. State of Florida, 272 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
Christopher Leon Jacobs v. State of Florida, 272 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). “The language of section 784.0487(4) indicates that willful violation of an injunction can be "violated in multiple, alternative ways," each of which can be punished as separate offenses if they constitute distinct criminal acts.”
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “24 VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST [STALKING] [CYBERSTALKING] § 784.0487(4), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Violation of an Injunction for Protection Against [Stalking] [Cyberstalking], the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1.”
Wyandt v. Voccio, 148 So. 3d 543 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). “See § 784.0487. The case before us is not moot because collateral legal consequences remain that affect Mr.”
In Re: Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases—report 2016-04, 206 So. 3d 14 (Fla. 2016). “24 VIOLATION OF AN INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST [STALKING] [CYBERSTALKING] § 784.0487(4), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Violation of an Injunction for Protection Against [Stalking] [Cyberstalking], the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable…”
Mehrdad Shahgodary v. State of Florida (Fla. 4th DCA 2022). “Defendant argues that: (1) he was denied the right to a unanimous jury verdict, and (2) the jury instructions permitted the jury to convict him based on actions that do not violate section 784.0487, Florida Statutes (2019).”
In Re: Amendments to the Florida Supreme Court Approved Fam. Law Forms, 173 So. 3d 19 (Fla. 2015). “15, Florida Statutes, for any violation of its provisions, which constitutes a criminal act under Section 784.0487, Florida Statutes. 3. THIS INJUNCTION IS ENFORCEABLE IN ALL COUNTIES OF FLORIDA AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MAY EFFECT ARRESTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 901.”
In re Amendments to the Florida Supreme Court Approved Fam. Law Forms, 113 So. 3d 781 (Fla. 2013). “15, Florida Statutes, for any violation of its provisions, which constitutes a criminal act under Section 784.0487, Florida Statutes. 3. THIS INJUNCTION IS ENFORCEABLE IN ALL COUNTIES OF FLORIDA AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MAY EFFECT ARRESTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 901.”
In Re Amendments to Florida Supreme Court Approved Fam. Law Forms, 142 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 2014). “15, Florida Statutes, for any violation of its provisions, which constitutes a criminal act under Section 784.0487, Florida Statutes. 3. THIS INJUNCTION IS ENFORCEABLE IN ALL COUNTIES OF FLORIDA AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MAY EFFECT ARRESTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 901.”
Scocozzo v. Attorney Gen. of Florida (M.D. Fla. 2025). “According to Scocozzo, the statute violates the First and Second Amendments by interfering with his right to travel and possess a firearm.”
— 784.0487(4) — 4 cases
Christopher Leon Jacobs v. State of Florida, 272 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). “The language of section 784.0487(4) indicates that willful violation of an injunction can be "violated in multiple, alternative ways," each of which can be punished as separate offenses if they constitute distinct criminal acts.”
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “24 VIOLATION OF INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST [STALKING] [CYBERSTALKING] § 784.0487(4), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Violation of an Injunction for Protection Against [Stalking] [Cyberstalking], the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1.”
In Re: Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases—report 2016-04, 206 So. 3d 14 (Fla. 2016). “24 VIOLATION OF AN INJUNCTION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST [STALKING] [CYBERSTALKING] § 784.0487(4), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Violation of an Injunction for Protection Against [Stalking] [Cyberstalking], the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable…”
Mehrdad Shahgodary v. State of Florida (Fla. 4th DCA 2022). “Defendant argues that: (1) he was denied the right to a unanimous jury verdict, and (2) the jury instructions permitted the jury to convict him based on actions that do not violate section 784.0487, Florida Statutes (2019).”
— 784.0487(4)(a) — 3 cases
Christopher Leon Jacobs v. State of Florida, 272 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). “The language of section 784.0487(4) indicates that willful violation of an injunction can be "violated in multiple, alternative ways," each of which can be punished as separate offenses if they constitute distinct criminal acts.”
Mehrdad Shahgodary v. State of Florida (Fla. 4th DCA 2022). “Defendant argues that: (1) he was denied the right to a unanimous jury verdict, and (2) the jury instructions permitted the jury to convict him based on actions that do not violate section 784.0487, Florida Statutes (2019).”
Scocozzo v. Attorney Gen. of Florida (M.D. Fla. 2025). “According to Scocozzo, the statute violates the First and Second Amendments by interfering with his right to travel and possess a firearm.”
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.