Fla. Stat. » 812
Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 812.019 (2025)

Dealing in stolen property.

✓ 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
812.019 Dealing in stolen property.—
(1) Any person who traffics in, or endeavors to traffic in, property that he or she knows or should know was stolen shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in ss. 775.082, 775.083, and 775.084.
(2) Any person who initiates, organizes, plans, finances, directs, manages, or supervises the theft of property and traffics in such stolen property shall be guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in ss. 775.082, 775.083, and 775.084.
History.—s. 7, ch. 77-342; s. 1237, ch. 97-102.

Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 812.019

M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd
§812.019(1)STOLEN PROP-DEAL INDEALING TRAFFIC STOLEN PROPERTYF · 2nd
§812.019(2)STOLEN PROP-DEAL INORGANIZED DEALING TRAFFIC STOLEN PROPF · 1st
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 191 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: United Tech. Corp. v. Mazer, 556 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Tech. Corp. v. Mazer, 556 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2009). · cites it 4× “On August 27, 2004, Mazer pled guilty in Florida state court to a criminal charge of dealing in stolen property, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 812.019 , in connection with his purchase and sale of the stolen Pratt blueprints.”
Goddard v. State, 458 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 1984). · cites it 23× “014, entitled "Theft;" section 812.019, "Dealing in stolen property;" and section 812.”
Hall v. State, 826 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2002). · cites it 7× “014) and the dealing in stolen property statute (section 812.019) "by providing that a defendant may be charged with both theft and dealing in stolen property, but cannot be found guilty of both crimes.”
Burrell v. State, 601 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). · cites it 13× “Burrell did not argue the distinction between subsections 1 and 2 of section 812.019 in his motion for judgment of acquittal, "it would be fundamental error not to correct on appeal a situation where [a defendant] stands convicted of a crime that never occurred.”
State v. Rios, 409 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). · cites it 14× “1979), has construed the above statute as follows: "An examination of this enactment [§ 812.019(1), Fla. Stat. (1979)] reveals nothing to support the conclusion that persons could be convicted under its provisions for conduct that is essentially innocent in nature.”
Blackmon v. State, 121 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 2013). · cites it 7× “011 or stealing property with intent to traffic in the stolen goods pursuant to section 812.019. Just as the trier of fact must make a choice if the defendant goes to trial, so too must the trial judge make a choice if the defendant enters a plea of nolo contendere to both…”
State v. Camp, 596 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 1992). · cites it 7× “[1] The issue is whether attempting to negotiate forged checks constitutes dealing in stolen property under section 812.019, Florida Statutes (1989).”
Stand. Jury Inst. in Cr. Cases No. 2006-2, 962 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2007). · cites it 4× “2 DEALING IN STOLEN PROPERTY (FENCING) § 812.019(1), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of (crime charged) Dealing in Stolen Property (Fencing), the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1.”
Alexander v. State, 470 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). · cites it 11× “019(2), and remand for entry of adjudication of guilt and resentencing pursuant to Section 812.019(1), and Goddard v. State .”
Gonzalez v. State, 948 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). · cites it 7× “Eric Gonzalez appeals his conviction of dealing in stolen property in violation of section 812.019(1), Florida Statutes (2001).”
Ridley v. State, 407 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). · cites it 4× “However, since dealing in stolen property is a felony of the second degree, § 812.019, Fla. Stat. (1979), and grand theft of the second degree is but a felony of the third degree, § 812.”
Kiss v. State, 42 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). · cites it 4× “2006) (stating that when an appellate court determines that dual convictions are impermissible because they violate double jeopardy, "the appellate court should reverse the lesser offense conviction and affirm the greater").”
Show all 191 citing cases →
— 812.019(1) — 113 cases
State v. Rios, 409 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). “1979), has construed the above statute as follows: "An examination of this enactment [§ 812.019(1), Fla. Stat. (1979)] reveals nothing to support the conclusion that persons could be convicted under its provisions for conduct that is essentially innocent in nature.”
Hall v. State, 826 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2002). “014) and the dealing in stolen property statute (section 812.019) "by providing that a defendant may be charged with both theft and dealing in stolen property, but cannot be found guilty of both crimes.”
Blackmon v. State, 121 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 2013). “011 or stealing property with intent to traffic in the stolen goods pursuant to section 812.019. Just as the trier of fact must make a choice if the defendant goes to trial, so too must the trial judge make a choice if the defendant enters a plea of nolo contendere to both…”
Gonzalez v. State, 948 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). “Eric Gonzalez appeals his conviction of dealing in stolen property in violation of section 812.019(1), Florida Statutes (2001).”
Burrell v. State, 601 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). “Burrell did not argue the distinction between subsections 1 and 2 of section 812.019 in his motion for judgment of acquittal, "it would be fundamental error not to correct on appeal a situation where [a defendant] stands convicted of a crime that never occurred.”
— 812.019(2) — 19 cases
Goddard v. State, 458 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 1984). “014, entitled "Theft;" section 812.019, "Dealing in stolen property;" and section 812.”
Burrell v. State, 601 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). “Burrell did not argue the distinction between subsections 1 and 2 of section 812.019 in his motion for judgment of acquittal, "it would be fundamental error not to correct on appeal a situation where [a defendant] stands convicted of a crime that never occurred.”
Alexander v. State, 470 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). “019(2), and remand for entry of adjudication of guilt and resentencing pursuant to Section 812.019(1), and Goddard v. State .”
Stand. Jury Inst. in Cr. Cases No. 2006-2, 962 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2007). “2 DEALING IN STOLEN PROPERTY (FENCING) § 812.019(1), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of (crime charged) Dealing in Stolen Property (Fencing), the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1.”
Rhames v. State, 473 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
— 812.019(l) — 1 case
Blackmon v. State, 121 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 2013). “011 or stealing property with intent to traffic in the stolen goods pursuant to section 812.019. Just as the trier of fact must make a choice if the defendant goes to trial, so too must the trial judge make a choice if the defendant enters a plea of nolo contendere to both…”
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 Florida Bar member Graham W. Syfert, a Jacksonville, Florida criminal defense attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). Attorney Syfert regularly handles Chapter 812 matters in the context of theft, robbery, and property crime defense and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.