Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 815.06 (2025)
Offenses against users of computers, computer systems, computer networks, and electronic devices.
✓ 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
815.06 Offenses against users of computers, computer systems, computer networks, and electronic devices.—
(1) As used in this section, the term “user” means a person with the authority to operate or maintain a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device.
(2) A person commits an offense against users of computers, computer systems, computer networks, or electronic devices if he or she willfully, knowingly, and without authorization or exceeding authorization:
(a) Accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device with knowledge that such access is unauthorized or the manner of use exceeds authorization;
(b) Disrupts or denies or causes the denial of the ability to transmit data to or from an authorized user of a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device, which, in whole or in part, is owned by, under contract to, or operated for, on behalf of, or in conjunction with another;
(c) Destroys, takes, injures, or damages equipment or supplies used or intended to be used in a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device;
(d) Destroys, injures, or damages any computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device;
(e) Introduces any computer contaminant into any computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device; or
(f) Engages in audio or video surveillance of an individual by accessing any inherent feature or component of a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device, including accessing the data or information of a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device that is stored by a third party.
(3)(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c), a person who violates subsection (2) commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(b) A person commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if he or she violates subsection (2) and:
1. Damages a computer, computer equipment or supplies, a computer system, or a computer network and the damage or loss is at least $5,000;
2. Commits the offense for the purpose of devising or executing any scheme or artifice to defraud or obtain property;
3. Interrupts or impairs a governmental operation or public communication, transportation, or supply of water, gas, or other public service; or
4. Intentionally interrupts the transmittal of data to or from, or gains unauthorized access to, a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device belonging to any mode of public or private transit, as defined in s. 341.031.
(c) A person who violates subsection (2) commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if the violation:
1. Endangers human life; or
2. Disrupts a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device that affects medical equipment used in the direct administration of medical care or treatment to a person.
(4) A person who willfully, knowingly, and without authorization modifies equipment or supplies used or intended to be used in a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(5)(a) In addition to any other civil remedy available, the owner or lessee of the computer, computer system, computer network, computer program, computer equipment or supplies, electronic device, or computer data may bring a civil action against a person convicted under this section for compensatory damages.
(b) In an action brought under this subsection, the court may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.
(6) A computer, computer system, computer network, computer software, computer data, or electronic device owned by a defendant that is used during the commission of a violation of this section or a computer or electronic device owned by the defendant that is used as a repository for the storage of software or data obtained in violation of this section is subject to forfeiture as provided under ss. 932.701-932.704.
(7) This section does not apply to a person who:
(a) Acts pursuant to a search warrant or to an exception to a search warrant authorized by law;
(b) Acts within the scope of his or her lawful employment; or
(c) Performs authorized security operations of a government or business.
(8) For purposes of bringing a civil or criminal action under this section, a person who causes, by any means, the access to a computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device in one jurisdiction from another jurisdiction is deemed to have personally accessed the computer, computer system, computer network, or electronic device in both jurisdictions.
(9) This chapter does not impose liability on a provider of an interactive computer service as defined in 47 U.S.C. s. 230(f), information service as defined in 47 U.S.C. s. 153, or communications service as defined in s. 202.11 that provides the transmission, storage, or caching of electronic communications or messages of others; other related telecommunications or commercial mobile radio service; or content provided by another person.
Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 815.06
M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd§815.06(3)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7739
§815.06(4)PROPERTY CRIMESMODIFY COMPUTER EQUIP SUPPLY ELEC DEV W/O AUTH
§815.06FRAUDREPEALED CH 2001-54
§815.06(1a)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7725
§815.06(1b)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7726
§815.06(1c)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7728
§815.06(1d)DAMAGE PROPRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7729
§815.06(1e)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7730
§815.06(2a)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC #10611
§815.06(2a)FRAUD AND ABUSE -- COMPUTERACCESS COMPUTR/ELECTRONIC DEVICE W/O AUTHORITY
§815.06(2b)FRAUD-SWINDLEREPEALED CH 2001-54
§815.06(2b)PROPERTY CRIMESDISRUPT DENY ABILITY TRANSMIT DATA COMPTR NTWK
§815.06(2b)PROPERTY CRIMESDISRPT DENY ABLTY TRANS DATA CMPTR SYS ELE DEV
§815.06(2b1)PROPERTY CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7733
§815.06(2b2)FRAUDRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7734
§815.06(2b3)PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7735
§815.06(2c)PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC # 7737
§815.06(2c)PROPERTY CRIMESTAKE DMGE COMPUTER EQUP SUPPLIES ELECTRNIC DEV
§815.06(2d)DAMAGE PROPDESTROY DAMAGE CMPTER OR SYST NTWK OR ELEC DEV
§815.06(2e)PROPERTY CRIMESINTRODUCE COMPUTER CONTAMINANT
§815.06(2f)PROPERTY CRIMESAUDIO VIDEO SURV ACCESS CMPTR SYS NTWK ELE DEV
§815.06(2f)PROPERTY CRIMESACCES DATA INFO CMPTR SYS NTWK ELE DEV 3RD PTY
§815.06(3b1)PROPERTY CRIMESDAMAGE COMPUTER/SYSTEM/NETWORK VALUE GT K
§815.06(3b2)FRAUDRENUMBERED. SEE REC #10612
§815.06(3b2)FRAUD AND ABUSE -- COMPUTERCOMPUTER CRIME TO DEFRAUD OBTAIN PROPERTY
§815.06(3b3)PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC #10613
§815.06(3b3)FRAUD AND ABUSE -- COMPUTERCOMPUTER CRIME IMPAIR PUBLIC SERVICE
§815.06(3b4)PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESCMPTR CRIME INTRUPT ACCESS PUB PRIV TRANSIT
§815.06(3c1)PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC #10614
§815.06(3c1)FRAUD AND ABUSE -- COMPUTERCOMPUTER CRIME ENDANGER HUMAN LIFE
§815.06(3c2)PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESRENUMBERED. SEE REC #10615
§815.06(3c2)FRAUD AND ABUSE -- COMPUTERDISRUPT MED EQUIP TREATMENT VIA COMPUTER CRIME
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2024 · leading case: Rodriguez v. State, 956 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
Rodriguez v. State, 956 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “As to the section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2003) violation, I concur with the reversal because I believe that appellant fell under the section 815.”
In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2010-02, 44 So. 3d 565 (Fla. 2010). “8, in light of section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2009), defining distinct “Offenses Against Computer Users.”
Mario Crapps v. State of Florida, 180 So. 3d 1125 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). “■Section 815.06 was enacted in 1978, long before the advent of the Internet and the proliferation of social media accounts such as Instagram.”
Newberger v. State, 641 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). “We note that section 815.06, Florida Statutes (1991) [2] , which criminalizes accessing a computer without authorization, is similar to the statute under which Joyner was charged.”
United States v. Richard Stanley, 753 F.3d 114 (3rd Cir. 2014). “11, § 932; Fla. Stat. Ann. § 815.06 ; Ind.Code Ann. § 35-43-2-3; Iowa Code Ann.”
Gallagher v. State, 618 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). “Appellant argues that her conviction under section 815.06, Florida Statutes (1991), which criminally sanctions a person who accesses a computer system willfully, knowingly and without authorization, is inappropriate because the undisputed facts set forth in her sworn motion to…”
Briggs v. State, 704 A.2d 904 (Md. 1998). “, Fla. Stat. Ann. § 815.06 (1) (West 1994 & Supp.”
Therrien v. State, 637 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). “NOTES [1] §§ 815.06, 777.04, Fla. Stat. (1989). [2] § 812.”
Umhoefer v. State, 235 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). “1st DCA 2015), for the proposition that accessing a person’s specific account was insufficient to prove a violation of section 815.06. In Crapps, the First District determined that the State had failed to prove a violation of section 815,06(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2013), 2 when…”
Doe v. Predator Catchers, Inc. (M.D. Fla. 2024). “24, 2009) (citing Fla. Stat. § 815.06 (4)(a)); see also Harvey v.”
Willoughby v. State, 84 So. 3d 1210 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). “Subsection (6) of section 815.06 clarifies that the section “does not apply to any person who accesses his or her employer’s computer system .”
— 815.06(1) — 2 cases
Gallagher v. State, 618 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). “Appellant argues that her conviction under section 815.06, Florida Statutes (1991), which criminally sanctions a person who accesses a computer system willfully, knowingly and without authorization, is inappropriate because the undisputed facts set forth in her sworn motion to…”
In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2010-02, 44 So. 3d 565 (Fla. 2010). “8, in light of section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2009), defining distinct “Offenses Against Computer Users.”
— 815.06(1)(a) — 1 case
Rodriguez v. State, 956 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “As to the section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2003) violation, I concur with the reversal because I believe that appellant fell under the section 815.”
— 815.06(2)(a) — 1 case
Umhoefer v. State, 235 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). “1st DCA 2015), for the proposition that accessing a person’s specific account was insufficient to prove a violation of section 815.06. In Crapps, the First District determined that the State had failed to prove a violation of section 815,06(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2013), 2 when…”
— 815.06(2)(b) — 1 case
In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2010-02, 44 So. 3d 565 (Fla. 2010). “8, in light of section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2009), defining distinct “Offenses Against Computer Users.”
— 815.06(3) — 1 case
In Re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2010-02, 44 So. 3d 565 (Fla. 2010). “8, in light of section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2009), defining distinct “Offenses Against Computer Users.”
— 815.06(6) — 1 case
Rodriguez v. State, 956 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “As to the section 815.06, Florida Statutes (2003) violation, I concur with the reversal because I believe that appellant fell under the section 815.”
— 815.06(l)(a) — 2 cases
Mario Crapps v. State of Florida, 180 So. 3d 1125 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). “■Section 815.06 was enacted in 1978, long before the advent of the Internet and the proliferation of social media accounts such as Instagram.”
Willoughby v. State, 84 So. 3d 1210 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). “Subsection (6) of section 815.06 clarifies that the section “does not apply to any person who accesses his or her employer’s computer system .”
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.