Cases from cite.case.law:

THORNE, v. STATE, 271 So. 3d 177 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . relationships "or make some reference thereto," and argued that such evidence was inadmissible under section 794.022 . . . exclude evidence that would otherwise be admissible under the Florida Evidence Code; instead, section 794.022 . . . battery may not be admitted into evidence in a prosecution under s. 787.06, s. 794.011, or s. 800.04. § 794.022 . . .

TEACHMAN, v. STATE, 264 So. 3d 242 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . . § 794.022, Fla. Stat.; Gomez v. State , 245 So.3d 950, 953 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). . . . exclude evidence that would otherwise be admissible under the Florida Evidence Code; instead, section 794.022 . . . defendant's "right to full and fair cross-examination, guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, may limit [ section 794.022 . . . substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice and is precluded from admission under section 794.022 . . .

AMELIO, v. STATE, 253 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . The challenged instruction references section 794.022(4), Florida Statutes, and states: "Evidence of . . . The State argues the court correctly read the instruction based on section 794.022(4), Florida Statutes . . . The State argues: "[b]ased on [ section 794.022(4) ] and the fact that consent was the defense asserted . . . Section 794.022 is an evidentiary statute. . . .

ARROYO, v. STATE, 252 So. 3d 374 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Before trial, the State filed a motion in limine pursuant to the Rape Shield Statute, section 794.022 . . . with Tyler prior to arriving at Juarez's party on the authority of the Rape Shield Statute, section 794.022 . . . other than the offender shall not be admitted into evidence" in a prosecution for sexual battery. § 794.022 . . . Upon review by the Florida Supreme Court, the Court noted that "[u]nder section 794.022(2), a victim's . . . the victim's character as the kind of person who engages in this type of explicit text messaging. § 794.022 . . .

GOMEZ, v. STATE, 245 So. 3d 950 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . that the examination of her relationship with her employer would violate the rape shield law, section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (2013), prohibits questioning a victim regarding a sexual relationship . . . Moreover, even if the conduct were considered consensual, and thus within the ambit of section 794.022 . . .

ROBINSON, v. STATE, 241 So. 3d 972 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Although Florida's Rape Shield law generally precludes this type of evidence to show consent, § 794.022 . . .

PORTILLO, v. STATE, 211 So. 3d 1135 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Portillo argues that the victim’s testimony violated section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (2014), a subsection . . . that his conviction should be reversed because the victim’s testimony in this regard violated section 794.022 . . . is so similar to the conduct or behavior in the case that it is relevant to the issue of consent. § 794.022 . . . In fact, since it was enacted, section 794.022(2) has been applied to limit only the defense; it has . . . Finally, even if Portillo had preserved an objection and even if section 794.022(2) provides a blanket . . . sexual battery case has the same right as does the victim to invoke Florida’s Rape Shield Law, section 794.022 . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES- INSTRUCTIONS A A, 190 So. 3d 1055 (Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 794.022(4), Fla. Stat. . . . . Give if requested. § 794.022, Fla. Stat. . . . Give if requested. § 794.022, Fla. Stat. . . . Give if requested. § 794.022, Fla. Stat. . . .

GUTIERREZ, v. STATE, 177 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 2015)

. . . opening statement that there was a lack of corroboration of the alleged crime, and because section 794.022 . . . trial court in this case agreed to give the “no corroboration” instruction, in part, because section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022, titled “Rules of evidence,” addresses the admission and exclusion of certain evidentiary . . . The Second District in Brmm set forth a detailed history of section 794.022(1), and observed that the . . . The principle of law in section 794.022(1), the “no corroboration” provision, is not intended to be a . . .

COOPER, v. STATE, 137 So. 3d 530 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . The court granted the state’s motion in limine to prevent such cross-examination based upon section 794.022 . . . See § 794.022(2)-(3), Fla. . . .

ANDERSON, v. STATE, 133 So. 3d 646 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . ." § 794.022(3), Fla. Stat. (2011). . . .

GUTIERREZ, v. STATE, 133 So. 3d 1123 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . State argued that the requested special instruction used the exact statutory language from section 794.022 . . . The permissibility of a special “no corroboration” jury instruction rooted in the language of section 794.022 . . . special instruction reviewed in Brown involved the verbatim use of the statutory language in section 794.022 . . . However, it concluded the history of section 794.022(1) revealed that the statute was directed at the . . . Brown opposed the requested instruction on the basis that section 794.022(1) was only pertinent to the . . .

WARE, v. STATE, 124 So. 3d 388 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Evid. 412; § 794.022, Fla. Stat. (2013); Charles W. . . .

TORRES, v. STATE, 54 So. 3d 535 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Another aspect of this case is that pursuant to section 794.022(3), Florida Statutes (2010), the State . . .

BROWN, Jr. v. STATE, 11 So. 3d 428 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . us to determine is whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury in accordance with section 794.022 . . . At the charge conference, the prosecutor requested a special jury instruction based on section 794.022 . . . The State’s requested instruction tracked the language of section 794.022(1) almost verbatim. . . . The History and Purpose of Section 794.022(1) The content of section 794.022(1) originated in 1974 as . . . Ch. 74-121, § 2, at 372, Laws of Fla.; § 794.022(1), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1974). . . .

VICTORY, v. STATE, 981 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Section 794.022, Florida Statutes (The Rape Shield Law), excludes “[sjpecific instances of prior consensual . . . may prove that the defendant was not the source of the semen, pregnancy, injury, or disease.... ” § 794.022 . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (2007), provides that specific instances of prior consensual sexual . . .

FRONCZAK, v. PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, G., 270 F. App'x 855 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . State § 794.022(1) (“The testimony of the victim need not be corroborated in a prosecution under § 794.011 . . .

ESTEBAN, v. STATE, 967 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . . § 794.022, Fla. Stat. (2005). In Marr v. . . . Evidence that the victim was a prostitute is reputation evidence, which under section 794.022(3) is inadmissible . . .

JOHNSON, v. W. MOORE,, 472 F. Supp. 2d 1344 (M.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . Indeed, this conceivably fits within 794.022 [the Florida Rape Shield Statute], a pattern of consent . . . sure 794.022 applies in prostitution generally, but even if we were to take the language of that, 794.022 . . . Florida Statute 790.— [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: 794.022, the rape shield statute. . . . [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: 794.022. THE COURT: You mean .022? [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Yes, Your Honor. . . . This exclusion was based on Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes, the Florida Rape Shield Law, which . . .

CARLYLE, v. STATE, 945 So. 2d 540 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . .” § 794.022(2), Fla. Stat. (2004). . . . Florida’s rape shield law, section 794.022(2), further provides that evidence [of prior sexual activity . . . hearing, the defense asserted that “prostitution is prostitution,” meaning that pursuant to section 794.022 . . . evidence relating to a victim’s prior sexual conduct” — which is specifically prohibited by section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1983), is merely a codification of this jurisdiction’s rule of . . .

G. DOCEKAL, v. STATE, 929 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Florida’s Rape Shield statute, section 794.022, Florida Statutes (2005), prohibits introduction into . . .

HOGAN, v. STATE, 908 So. 2d 498 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . See § 794.022(2), Fla. Stat. (2003). Compare Minus v. State, 901 So.2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). . . .

MINUS, v. STATE, 901 So. 2d 344 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . relevance as it applies in cases of sexual battery is codified in the rape-shield statute, section 794.022 . . . is so similar to the conduct or behavior in the case that it is relevant to the issue of consent. § 794.022 . . . As noted in the statute and in Kaplan, section 794.022 does not make this evidence inadmissible. . . .

STRONG, v. STATE, 853 So. 2d 1095 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in giving a jury instruction on subsection 794.022 . . . The trial court granted the State’s request to instruct the jury on subsection 794.022, Florida Statutes . . . The defense points out that section 794.022, Florida Statutes, is entitled “Rules of Evidence.” . . . The defense argues that in a companion part of section 794.022, subsection (4) addresses consent where . . . Id. § 794.022(4). . . .

L. STAPLES, v. STATE, 831 So. 2d 756 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . the purported testimony of Rodriguez would necessarily be inadmissable under the rape shield statute, 794.022 . . .

GILLIAM, v. STATE v. W., 817 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 2002)

. . . Furthermore, the instant evidence would not have been admissible under the Rape Shield Law, section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022 provides in pertinent part: (2) Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity . . . is so similar to the conduct or behavior in the case that it is relevant to the issue of consent. § 794.022 . . .

STATE v. ADDERLY,, 803 So. 2d 760 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . See § 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (2001). . . .

SALEEM, v. STATE, 773 So. 2d 89 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See § 794.022(1), Fla. Stat. (1999); Thomas v. State, 167 So.2d 309 (Fla.1964); Robinson v. . . .

RANCOURT, v. STATE, 766 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See § 794.022, Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

W. McLEAN, v. STATE, 754 So. 2d 176 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . The Rape Shield Statute, section 794.022, Florida Statutes (1995), prohibits evidence of specific instances . . . Section 794.022 is the codification of the rule of relevancy that a victim’s prior sexual activity with . . .

SMITH, v. HOOLIGAN S PUB OYSTER BAR, LTD., 753 So. 2d 596 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime . . .

COMMERFORD, v. STATE, 728 So. 2d 796 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . We also note that, notwithstanding section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1997), a victim’s prior sexual . . .

JORGENSON, v. STATE, 714 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 1998)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime . . .

RANKIN, v. EVANS, s, 133 F.3d 1425 (11th Cir. 1998)

. . . Stat. 794.022(1) (West Supp.1990), "[t]he testimony of the victim need not be corroborated in a prosecution . . .

MITCHELL, v. STATE, 695 So. 2d 810 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . . § 794.022(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . .

DELGADO, v. STATE, 680 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . § 794.022, Fla.Stat. (1995). . . .

HEDGES, v. STATE, 667 So. 2d 420 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022 [the rape shield law], evidence of a pertinent trait of character of . . .

CAMEJO, v. STATE, 660 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1995)

. . . Section 794.022 specifically provides that testimony of a sexual abuse victim need not be corroborated . . .

STATE v. CAMEJO,, 641 So. 2d 109 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Section 794.022 specifically provides that testimony of a sexual abuse victim need not be corroborated . . . However, section 794.022(1) specifically provides that testimony of a victim need not be corroborated . . .

DUPREE, v. STATE, 615 So. 2d 713 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022 [rules of evidence in sexual battery chapter], evidence of a pertinent . . .

R. DIXON, v. STATE, 605 So. 2d 960 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . State, 407 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), and exclusion under the rape shield statute, section 794.022 . . .

LANGSTON, Jr. v. STATE, 603 So. 2d 104 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . appear that the proffer satisfied the requirements for demonstrating an exception under subsection 794.022 . . .

McGRIFF, v. STATE, 601 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . ’s attorney suggested to the judge that although he would object to the specific testimony, section 794.022 . . .

ROBERTS, v. K. SINGLETARY,, 794 F. Supp. 1106 (S.D. Fla. 1992)

. . . . § 794.022 denied him his Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights to present a defense, to cross-examination . . . Ann. § 794.022. . . .

STATE v. PANCOAST,, 596 So. 2d 162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . In accordance with section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1989), the judge conducted an in camera proceeding . . .

CASTRO, v. STATE, 591 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . concerns the action of the trial judge in excluding, purportedly under the rape shield statute, section 794.022 . . .

LEWIS, v. STATE, 591 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1991)

. . . position that the testimony was inadmissible as evidence of a victim’s prior sexual activity under section 794.022 . . . The trial court made no ruling on the applicability of section 794.022(2), instead relying on our decision . . . , evidence of the victim’s sexual relationship with her boyfriend was held irrelevant under section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1987), reads, in pertinent part: Specific instances of prior consensual . . . Our decision does not directly address section 794.022 and should not be read to cast doubt on the validity . . .

DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, v. S. WISE, M. D., 575 So. 2d 713 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . The first argument in support of this point is founded upon Section 794.022, Florida Statutes, which . . . Section 794.022 is expressly limited by its own language to “prosecution[s] under s. 794.011.” . . .

ROBINSON, v. STATE, 575 So. 2d 699 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . argues, among other things, that the trial court erred in applying Florida’s Rape Shield Law, section 794.022 . . . After the state rested its case, the state, relying on section 794.022, moved in limine to prohibit appellant . . . Section 794.022 provides in pertinent part: (2) Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity . . .

LEWIS, v. STATE, 570 So. 2d 412 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . that respective counsel debated the possible applicability of Florida’s rape shield statute, see § 794.022 . . . However, we note that section 794.022(2) and (3) has been held to be an explicit statement of the rule . . . analysis of this issue necessarily takes into account cases decided under the provisions of section 794.022 . . .

MARX, a v. H. GUMBINNER,, 905 F.2d 1503 (11th Cir. 1990)

. . . . § 794.022(1) (West Supp.1990). . . . We find no Florida case applying section 794.022(1) to similar facts, but we need not decide whether . . .

YOUNG, v. STATE, 562 So. 2d 370 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . .” § 794.022(2), Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

PADGETT, v. STATE, 551 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 794.022, Fla.Stat. (1987). . Cotita v. . . .

ANDERSON, v. STATE, 549 So. 2d 807 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . A Florida statute (§ 794.022(1), Fla.Stat.) expressly provides that the testimony of a victim need not . . .

CAMPBELL, v. STATE, 553 So. 2d 184 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Appellant contends that the testimony of the witnesses would have been admissible under section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes. . . .

JACOB, v. STATE, 546 So. 2d 113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime . . .

ORTIZ, v. STATE, 545 So. 2d 926 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Affirmed on the authority of section 794.022, Florida Statutes (1987), and Kaplan v. . . .

STATE v. COE, III,, 521 So. 2d 373 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . We note that section 794.022(1), Florida Statutes (1987), provides that the testimony of a sexual battery . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA v. STEWART, 25 Fla. Supp. 2d 1 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1987)

. . . Section 794.022(2) (1985). . . .

ROBERTS, v. STATE, 510 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1987)

. . . the alleged prostitution does not fall within the parameters of Florida's Rape Shield Law, section 794.022 . . . specific instance of prior consensual sexual activity” with one other than the defendant under section 794.022 . . . (2), nor is it reputation evidence under section 794.022(3), we believe this is precisely the type of . . . Section 794.022(2) and (3) is a codification of the rule of relevancy as it applies to the prior sexual . . .

G. WILLIAMS, v. STATE, 507 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime . . . offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or ****** (NOTE: Section 794.022 deals . . .

VIZZI, v. STATE, 501 So. 2d 613 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . The trial court ruled, based on its interpretation of the Rape Victim Shield Statute [§ 794.022, Fla.Stat . . . here, to demonstrate fabrication, rather than consent or identity, the Rape Victim Shield Statute [§ 794.022 . . .

MARR, v. STATE, 494 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 1986)

. . . First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ruling on the constitutionality of section 794.022 . . . Under section 794.022(2), a victim’s prior sexual activity with anyone other than the accused is generally . . . proffered questions may have had is clearly overshadowed in this case by the policy enunciated in section 794.022 . . . carefully protected petitioner’s rights while at the same time furthered the policy manifested in section 794.022 . . . McDonald, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur. . § 794.022(2), Fla.Stat (1983 . . .

WOODSON, v. STATE, 483 So. 2d 858 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime . . .

BAEZA, v. STATE, 489 So. 2d 36 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . The court based its ruling on section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1985) — Florida’s rape-shield statute . . . Associate Judge, concur. . § 794.011(2), Fla.Stat. (1983); § 794.01 l(4)(e), Fla.Stat. (1983). . § 794.022 . . .

DEEL, v. STATE, 481 So. 2d 15 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . This issue focuses on the definition of “injury” under section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1983), which . . .

KEMP, v. STATE, 464 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . The trial judge refused to allow the proffered testimony on the strength of section 794.022(2), Florida . . . Section 794.022(2) forbids the admission into evidence of any specific instances of prior sexual activity . . . Appellant contends that the exclusion of the proffered question and answer on the authority of section 794.022 . . .

MARR, v. STATE, 470 So. 2d 703 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . First, that the trial court erred in holding Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes, constitutional in . . . Appellant first contends that the trial judge erred in holding constitutional section 794.022(2), because . . . Section 794.022(2) provides in part that specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between . . . trial judge ruled that this line of questioning was inadmissible, because it was barred by section 794.022 . . . Similarly, we find that section 794.022(2) is constitutional as applied to the facts before us. . . . forcible carnal knowledge), by Chapter 74-121, Section 1, Laws of Florida (2) the amendment of Section 794.022 . . . Nothing in Sections 794.01 or 794.022, Florida Statutes, before repeal or after amendment, contained . . . In fact, the deletion of the language formerly in Section 794.022(1), by Chapter 83-258, Section 1, Laws . . . State, 337 So.2d 788 (Fla.1976) the Supreme Court, in examining s. 794.022(1) stated "if the testimony . . . Probable Effect of Proposed Changes: HB 348 would amend s. 794.022(1) to remove from the court the power . . . Prior to 1983, Section 794.022, Florida Statutes, entitled "Rules of Evidence,” provided as follows: . . .

KAPLAN, v. STATE, 451 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1983), provides in pertinent part: Specific instances of prior . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1983), is merely a codification of this jurisdiction’s rule of . . . Section 794.022(2), Fla.Stat. (1983). . . . This is the testimony that was excluded, I think erroneously, under the provisions of Section 794.022 . . . with the result that case law must be followed.[] Not only are there substantive defects in section 794.022 . . .

ADKINS, v. STATE, 448 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Both parties appropriately rely upon section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1981), which provides: Specific . . . with it on a particular occasion, except: (b) Character of the victim,— (1) Except as provided in s. 794.022 . . . Section 794.022 does, however, bar evidence of specific sexual acts unless that evidence establishes . . . isolated act of premarital sex did not constitute a “pattern of conduct” within the meaning of Section 794.022 . . . Each ease to which section 794.022(2) applies is going to involve a judgment call by the trial judge. . . .

WINTERS, a k a a k a G. v. STATE, 425 So. 2d 203 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . . § 794.022(2), Fla.Stat. (1981): Specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the . . .

McELVEEN, v. STATE, 415 So. 2d 746 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . a pattern of conduct which was legally relevant to the issue of consent in accordance with Section 794.022 . . . Section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1979), provides: Specific instances of prior consensual sexual . . . particular occasion, except: * * * * * * (b) Character of the victim.— (1) Except as provided in s. 794.022 . . . Section 794.022 does, however, bar evidence of specific sexual acts unless that evidence establishes . . . isolated act of premarital sex did not constitute a “pattern of conduct” within the meaning of Section 794.022 . . .

BURWICK, v. STATE, 408 So. 2d 722 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . would include evidence of specific instances of sexual activity by the victim, excluded by Section 794.022 . . .

F. HICKS, v. STATE, 388 So. 2d 357 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . State, 338 So.2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); § 794.022(1), Fla.Stat. (1979). . . .

HODGES, v. STATE, 386 So. 2d 888 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . Section 794.022(2), provides that specific instances of prior consensual sexual activity between the . . . evidence in prosecutions under Section 794.011, Florida Statutes; however, under the statute (Section 794.022 . . .

E. PENDLETON, v. STATE OF, 348 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)

. . . standard jury instruction rather than the special instruction requested by defendant, pursuant to Section 794.022 . . .