Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 794.022 (2025)

Rules of evidence.

✓ 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

794.022 Rules of evidence.—

(1) The testimony of the victim need not be corroborated in a prosecution under s. 787.06, s. 794.011, or s. 800.04.

(2) Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the victim and any person other than the offender may not be admitted into evidence in a prosecution under s. 787.06, s. 794.011, or s. 800.04. However, such evidence may be admitted if it is first established to the court in a proceeding in camera that such evidence may prove that the defendant was not the source of the semen, pregnancy, injury, or disease; or, when consent by the victim is at issue, such evidence may be admitted if it is first established to the court in a proceeding in camera that such evidence tends to establish a pattern of conduct or behavior on the part of the victim which is so similar to the conduct or behavior in the case that it is relevant to the issue of consent.

(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reputation evidence relating to a victim’s prior sexual conduct or evidence presented for the purpose of showing that manner of dress of the victim at the time of the offense incited the sexual battery may not be admitted into evidence in a prosecution under s. 787.06, s. 794.011, or s. 800.04.

(4) When consent of the victim is a defense to prosecution under s. 787.06, s. 794.011, or s. 800.04, evidence of the victim’s mental incapacity or defect is admissible to prove that the consent was not intelligent, knowing, or voluntary; and the court shall instruct the jury accordingly.

(5) An offender’s use of a prophylactic device, or a victim’s request that an offender use a prophylactic device, is not, by itself, relevant to either the issue of whether or not the offense was committed or the issue of whether or not the victim consented.

History.—s. 2, ch. 74-121; s. 237, ch. 77-104; s. 1, ch. 83-258; s. 1, ch. 90-40; s. 5, ch. 90-174; s. 25, ch. 93-156; s. 1, ch. 94-80; s. 5, ch. 2016-199.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 97 cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1977–2025 · leading case: Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). · cites it 21× “Section 794.022 in the 1974 supplement contains an erroneous reference to section 794.”

Rafael Alexander Gutierrez v. State of Florida, 177 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 2015). · cites it 24× “Section 794.022, titled “Rules of evidence,” addresses the admission and exclusion of certain evidentiary matters in prosecutions for sexual battery.”

Roberts v. State, 510 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1987). · cites it 6× “Roberts contends that testimony concerning the alleged prostitution does not fall within the parameters of Florida's Rape Shield Law, section 794.022, Florida Statutes, which provides in pertinent part: (2) Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the…”

Marr v. State, 470 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). · cites it 13× “01, Florida Statutes (rape and forcible carnal knowledge), by Chapter 74-121, Section 1, Laws of Florida (2) the amendment of Section 794.022, Florida Statutes, by Chapter 83-258, Section 1, Laws of Florida, deleting certain language permitting the court to instruct the jury…”

Lewis v. State, 591 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1991). · cites it 7× “[5] Our decision does not directly address section 794.022 and should not be read to cast doubt on the validity of that statute.”

Marr v. State, 494 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 1986). · cites it 8× “Whatever marginal utility or attenuated relevance the proffered questions may have had is clearly overshadowed in this case by the policy enunciated in section 794.022. We understand the concern expressed by the panel decision below, 470 So.”

Carlyle v. State, 945 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). · cites it 8× “" § 794.022(2), Fla. Stat. (2004). We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding this evidence.”

Kaplan v. State, 451 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). · cites it 8× “Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1983), provides in pertinent part: Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the victim and any person other than the offender shall not be admitted into evidence in a prosecution under s.”

McElveen v. State, 415 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). · cites it 6× “Section 794.022 does, however, bar evidence of specific sexual acts unless that evidence establishes a pattern of conduct relevant to the issue of consent.”

Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1981). · cites it 2× “§ 794.022(1), Fla. Stat. (1979). A majority of states has rejected the corroboration requirement which had no basis in common law, though the district court in Smith assumed otherwise.”

In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-instructions 7.8, 7.8(a), & 11.1-11.6(a), 190 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 8× “§ 794.022, Fla. Stat. (Victim’s) lack of chastity is not a defense to the crime charged.”

Larry Michael Thorne v. State of Florida, 271 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). · cites it 4× “§ 794.022(2-3), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added).”

Show all 97 citing cases →

— 794.022(1) — 13 cases

Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). “Section 794.022 in the 1974 supplement contains an erroneous reference to section 794.”

Rafael Alexander Gutierrez v. State of Florida, 177 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 2015). “Section 794.022, titled “Rules of evidence,” addresses the admission and exclusion of certain evidentiary matters in prosecutions for sexual battery.”

Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1981). “§ 794.022(1), Fla. Stat. (1979). A majority of states has rejected the corroboration requirement which had no basis in common law, though the district court in Smith assumed otherwise.”

Rankin v. Evans, 133 F.3d 1425 (11th Cir. 1998).

Marr v. State, 470 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). “01, Florida Statutes (rape and forcible carnal knowledge), by Chapter 74-121, Section 1, Laws of Florida (2) the amendment of Section 794.022, Florida Statutes, by Chapter 83-258, Section 1, Laws of Florida, deleting certain language permitting the court to instruct the jury…”

— 794.022(2) — 48 cases

Lewis v. State, 591 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1991). “[5] Our decision does not directly address section 794.022 and should not be read to cast doubt on the validity of that statute.”

Kaplan v. State, 451 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). “Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1983), provides in pertinent part: Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the victim and any person other than the offender shall not be admitted into evidence in a prosecution under s.”

Carlyle v. State, 945 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). “" § 794.022(2), Fla. Stat. (2004). We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding this evidence.”

Marr v. State, 494 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 1986). “Whatever marginal utility or attenuated relevance the proffered questions may have had is clearly overshadowed in this case by the policy enunciated in section 794.022. We understand the concern expressed by the panel decision below, 470 So.”

McElveen v. State, 415 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). “Section 794.022 does, however, bar evidence of specific sexual acts unless that evidence establishes a pattern of conduct relevant to the issue of consent.”

— 794.022(3) — 8 cases

Roberts v. State, 510 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1987). “Roberts contends that testimony concerning the alleged prostitution does not fall within the parameters of Florida's Rape Shield Law, section 794.022, Florida Statutes, which provides in pertinent part: (2) Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the…”

Anderson v. State, 549 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).

Arroyo v. State, 252 So. 3d 374 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

Carlyle v. State, 945 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). “" § 794.022(2), Fla. Stat. (2004). We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding this evidence.”

— 794.022(4) — 3 cases

In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-instructions 7.8, 7.8(a), & 11.1-11.6(a), 190 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. 2016). “§ 794.022, Fla. Stat. (Victim’s) lack of chastity is not a defense to the crime charged.”

Strong v. State, 853 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

James Amelio v. State of Florida, 253 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018).

— 794.022(5) — 2 cases

Strong v. State, 853 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

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.