Home
Menu
904-383-7448
Florida Statute 905.17 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 905.17 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 905.17

The 2022 Florida Statutes (including 2022 Special Session A and 2023 Special Session B)

Title XLVII
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONS
Chapter 905
GRAND JURY
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 905.17
905.17 Who may be present during session of grand jury.
(1) No person shall be present at the sessions of the grand jury except the witness under examination, one attorney representing the witness for the sole purpose of advising and consulting with the witness, the state attorney and her or his assistant state attorneys, designated assistants as provided for in s. 27.18, the court reporter or stenographer, and the interpreter. The stenographic records, notes, and transcriptions made by the court reporter or stenographer shall be filed with the clerk who shall keep them in a sealed container not subject to public inspection. The notes, records, and transcriptions are confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution and shall be released by the clerk only on request by a grand jury for use by the grand jury or on order of the court pursuant to s. 905.27.
(2) The witness may be represented before the grand jury by one attorney. This provision is permissive only and does not create a right to counsel for the grand jury witness. The attorney for the witness shall not be permitted to address the grand jurors, raise objections, make arguments, or otherwise disrupt proceedings before the grand jury. The attorney for the witness shall be permitted to advise and counsel the witness and shall be subject to the provisions of s. 905.27 in the same manner as all who appear before the grand jury. An attorney or law firm may not represent more than one person or entity in an investigation before the same grand jury or successive grand juries in the same investigation.
(3) No person shall be present while the grand jurors are deliberating or voting, except that an interpreter appointed pursuant to s. 90.6063(2) may be present after swearing to refrain from personal interjection and to uphold the secrecy of the proceeding.
(4) An intentional violation of the provisions of this section shall constitute indirect criminal contempt of court. Further, and in addition to any contempt sanction, if the court determines that the attorney for the witness has violated any of the provisions of subsection (2), then the court may take such measures as are necessary to ensure compliance with subsection (2), including exclusion of the offending attorney from the grand jury room.
(5) This section does not apply to proceedings of the statewide grand jury created in s. 905.33.
History.s. 96, ch. 19554, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 8663(96); s. 1, ch. 26584, 1951; s. 54, ch. 70-339; s. 2, ch. 74-627; s. 1, ch. 92-154; s. 3, ch. 93-125; s. 1, ch. 94-74; s. 434, ch. 96-406; s. 1833, ch. 97-102.

F.S. 905.17 on Google Scholar

F.S. 905.17 on Casetext

Amendments to 905.17


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 905.17
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 905.17.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

U.S. Supreme Court11th Cir. - Ct. App.11th Cir. - MD FL11th Cir. - ND FL11th Cir. - SD FLFed. Reg.Secondary Sources - All
  1. (xvi) Grand jury records. §§ 905.17, 905.28(1), Fla. Stat.
    PAGE 501
  2. (xvi) Grand jury records. Ch. 905 §§ 905.17, 905.28(1), Fla. Stat.
    PAGE 827
  3. Miller v. State

    42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010)   Cited 69 times
    Lastly, Miller asserts that a constitutional implementation of our capital sentencing statute would require the indictment to include the allegations that " sufficient aggravating circumstances exist as enumerated in subsection (5)," and that " there are insufficient mitigating circumstances to outweigh the aggravating circumstances." § 921.141(3) (emphasis supplied). This interpretation elevates form over substance in contradiction to the nature of the grand jury. If this express statutory language were included in an indictment, a grand jury would have to find that sufficient evidence of these allegations existed. See Fla, Std. Jury Instr. (Grand Jury) 2.1, 2.4. This is a misdirected interpretation of the capital sentencing statute. A grand jury session is an ex parte proceeding which usually does not consider both sides of an issue, fee Fla. Std. Jury Inst. (Grand Jury) 2.3. The function of the grand jury is to obtain evidence as to a charge of crime, by the State, and to determine whether the person so charged should be brought to trial. See id. Generally, the defendant is not even present unless testifying as a witness. See § 905.17( 1), Fla. Stat. (2005). The State…
  4. This record series consists of stenographic records, notes, and transcriptions made by the court reporter or stenographer during the grand jury session. These records are normally kept in a sealed container and are not subject to public inspection pursuant to Section 905.17(1), Florida Statutes. A Court order must be obtained for disposition.
    PAGE 914
  5. State v. Knight

    661 So. 2d 344 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 1 times
    In conclusion, the purpose of section 905.27 is to provide a limited exception to the public records exemption contained in section 905.17. Section 905.17 provides the general exemption from section 119.07 and thus is subject to the requirements of Article I, Section 24(c). While section 905.17 provides the general exemption for grand jury materials, section 905.27 merely encompasses an exception to the exemption contained in section 905.17. Nothing in Article I, Section 24 requires exceptions to a public record exemption to contain a public necessity statement. Thus, because section 905.27 does not provide an exemption to the public records requirement located at section 119.07, it is not subject to the requirements contained in Article I, Section 24(c). Accordingly, the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in reaching a contrary determination and in declaring section 905.27 unconstitutional for lack of a public necessity statement.
    PAGE 346
  6. In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure

    606 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1992)   Cited 18 times

    waitupon the grand jury as advisors, as examiners of witnesses, andto draw indictments. (See §§ 905.16, 905.17, 905.19, 905.22,27.02, 27.16, 27.21, 27.22, Fla. Stat.)Vagueness remains concerning the significance

    prosecuting attorney cannot bepresent while the grand jury is deliberating or voting (seesection 905.17, Florida Statutes) and has no voice in thedecision of whether an indictment is found (see section

  7. Thompson v. State

    565 So. 2d 1311 (Fla. 1990)   Cited 44 times
    Thompson made three claims regarding the grand jury proceedings, two of which merit brief discussion. First, he contends that the trial court erred by denying his pretrial request to record the grand jury proceedings. Sections 905.17 and 905.27 of the Florida Statutes (1987), do not establish a duty to record grand jury proceedings, nor do we find any constitutional basis to impose such a duty in all cases. In re Report of the Grand Jury, 533 So.2d 873, 875 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); accord United States v. Head, 586 F.2d 508 (5th Cir. 1978). Although recordation may be the best and most desirable practice, e.g., State v. McArthur, 296 So.2d 97, 100 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 306 So.2d 123 (Fla. 1974); United States v. Head, 586 F.2d at 511, that choice generally is one for the legislature. We agree with McArthur that the interests of justice may require trial courts to order recordation in some instances. McArthur, 296 So.2d at 100. However, no showing was made to establish that Thompson had a particular need to preserve grand jury testimony through recording. Under these circumstances, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion.
    PAGE 1313
  8. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Doe

    460 So. 2d 406 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 2 times
    Section 905.24, Florida Statutes (1983), provides "Grand Jury proceedings are secret. . . ." The question is whether the judge must conduct a closure hearing as contemplated by Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Lewis, 426 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1982), before he conducts an in camera hearing concerning a matter related to a grand jury proceeding. Petitioner argues, as it argued below, that the term "grand jury proceeding" is synonymous with "grand jury session" as defined in Section 905.17 Florida Statutes. Therefore, petitioner concludes that since the grand jury was not in session, the in camera hearing could not have been a grand jury proceeding which is secret pursuant to Section 905.24. The petition also implies that the presence of the judge rendered the hearing a judicial proceeding.
  9. In re Getty

    427 So. 2d 380 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 4 times
    Section 905.17(1) provides:
    PAGE 383
  10. Wheeler v. State

    311 So. 2d 713 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 2 times
    Appellant's second point that the indictment was defective because several assistant state attorneys simultaneously attended the grand jury during presentation of testimony was based upon the construction the District Court of Appeal, First District, placed upon §§ 905.17 and 905.19, F.S. in State ex rel. Christian v. Rudd, Fla.App. 1974, 302 So.2d 821. However, the Supreme Court rejected that interpretation of §§ 905.17 and 905.19, F.S. 1973, and held that said sections authorized the presence of more than one qualified assistant state attorney to be present at grand jury sessions. Rudd v. State ex rel. Christian, Fla. 1975, 310 So.2d 295, opinion filed February 10, 1975. Thus, it appears appellant's second point is ill-founded.
    PAGE 715

    Cases from cite.case.law:

    In FLORIDA RULE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION, 156 So. 3d 499 (Fla. 2015)

    . . . . §§ 905.17, 905.28(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

    In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION, 124 So. 3d 819 (Fla. 2013)

    . . . On 9Q5§§ 905.17, 905.28(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

    MILLER, v. STATE, 42 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 2010)

    . . . See § 905.17(1), Fla.'Stat. (2005). . . .

    REPORT OF THE SUPREME COURT WORKGROUP ON PUBLIC RECORDS, 825 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2002)

    . . . are normally kept in a sealed container and are not subject to public inspection pursuant to Section 905.17 . . .

    STATE v. KNIGHT,, 661 So. 2d 344 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

    . . . a public records exemption for grand jury testimony; such an exemption is contained within section 905.17 . . . Section 905.17(1) provides: The notes, records, and transcriptions [of the grand jury] are confidential . . . More importantly, in re-enacting section 905.17, the legislature did set forth a statement of public . . . Section 905.17 provides the general exemption from section 119.07 and thus is subject to the requirements . . . an exception to the exemption contained in section 905.17.Nothing in Article I, Section 24 requires . . .

    In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 606 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1992)

    . . . (See §§ 905.16, 905.17, 905.19, 905.22, 27.-02, 27.16, 27.21, & 27.22, Fla.Stat.) . . . prosecuting attorney cannot be present while the grand jury is deliberating or voting (see section 905.17 . . .

    THOMPSON, v. STATE, 565 So. 2d 1311 (Fla. 1990)

    . . . Sections 905.17 and 905.-27 of the Florida Statutes (1987), do not establish a duty to record grand jury . . .

    PALM BEACH NEWSPAPERS, INC. v. DOE, a a, 460 So. 2d 406 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

    . . . that the term “grand jury proceeding” is synonymous with “grand jury session” as defined in Section 905.17 . . .

    THE FLORIDA BAR, v. D. HAWKINS,, 450 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 1984)

    . . . The costs of these proceedings in the amount of $905.17 are assessed against the respondent. . . .

    In GETTY, 427 So. 2d 380 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

    . . . Appellant urges that because section 905.17(1), Florida Statutes (1979), restricts those present during . . . Section 905.17(1) provides: No person shall be present at the sessions of the grand jury except the witness . . .

    R. WHEELER, v. STATE, 311 So. 2d 713 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

    . . . testimony was based upon the construction the District Court of Appeal, First District, placed upon §§ 905.17 . . . However, the Supreme Court rejected that interpretation of §§ 905.17 and 905.19, F.S.1973, and held that . . .

    A. RUDD C. v. STATE T. CHRISTIAN,, 310 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1975)

    . . . . §§ 905.17 and 905.-19, F.S.A. . . . Fla.Stat. § 905.17(1), F.S.A., provides as follows: “No person shall be present at the sessions of the . . . Florida Statute 905.17(1) is specific as to who may be present at sessions of the Grand Jury and the . . . grand jurors legal advice regarding the offense lodged against the appellant contrary to F.S.A. §§ 905.17 . . .

    STATE T. CHRISTIAN, v. A. RUDD C., 302 So. 2d 821 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

    . . . persons actually conducted the interrogation of Petitioner before the Grand Jury in violation of F.S. 905.17 . . . The court, in its opinion, found the above procedure not violative of Florida Statutes 905.17 and 905.19 . . . subsequently amended by the 1970 Florida Legislature, in pertinent part as follows: Florida Statute 905.17 . . . Florida Statute 905.17 (1970-1974) “No person shall be present at the sessions of the grand jury except . . . attorney shall attend * * In view of the foregoing legislative amendments, a finding that Sections 905.17 . . .

    STATE v. O. McARTHUR,, 296 So. 2d 97 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

    . . . The defendant relies upon F.S.‘905.17, F.S.A., which provides: “905.17 Who may be present during session . . . F.S. 905.17, F.S.A., refers to who may be present tat grand jury sessions — rather than who must. . . . If there is to be a change in what we conceive to be the clear provisions of F.S. 905.17 and 905.27, . . .

    v., 39 Fla. Supp. 189 (Okeechobee Cty. Cir. Ct. 1973)

    . . . F.S.A. 905.17. . . . law was amended in 1951 by Chapter 26584, Laws of Florida, which today is known as Florida Statute 905.17 . . . The particular language of F.S. 905.17 is not clear and apparently no Florida court has specifically . . . complete record of the grand jury proceedings could be made and filed with the clerk as provided by F.S. 905.17 . . .

    M. SPENCER, v. M. SPENCER,, 242 So. 2d 786 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

    . . . Recently, in construing Section 905.17, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which provides that a grand juror failing . . . State, Fla.App. 1968, 217 So.2d 591, concluded: “* * * Section 905.17 provides only that violators may . . .

    STATE v. GARTENMAYER,, 239 So. 2d 116 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

    . . . The court further found that this violation of the statutes (See Section 905.17 Fla.Stat., F.S.A.) rendered . . .

    A. GONZALEZ, v. STATE, 220 So. 2d 393 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)

    . . . . §§ 905.17; 905.24; 905.27, F.S.A. . . .

    MATTOX, Jr. v. CARSON, LOWE, v. CARSON,, 295 F. Supp. 1054 (M.D. Fla. 1969)

    . . . would be entitled to the presence of counsel before these hearings which would be contrary to Section 905.17 . . .

    H. HARPER, v. STATE, 217 So. 2d 591 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1968)

    . . . Section 905.17, F.S.A.1965, and sentencing him to three days imprisonment. . . . Pinter’s presence inside the grand jury session was expressly contrary to Section 905.17, the applicable . . . to show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt for, “ * * * [Violation of Florida Statute 905.17 . . . and the proceedings generally that the trial court erroneously concluded that the terms of Section 905.17 . . . Thus, Section 905.17 provides only that violators may be found in contempt; it does not constitute a . . .

    In BREVARD COUNTY, GRAND JURY,, 206 So. 2d 398 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1968)

    . . . persons might be in contempt of the Circuit Court of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit under Section 905.17 . . . October 17 might be the basis of a charge of criminal contempt against one or more persons under Section 905.17 . . .

    STATE BATEMAN, v. J. O TOOLE,, 203 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

    . . . . § 905.17 provides: “ * * * The stenographic records, notes or any transcript thereof made by the court . . . F.S.A. § 905.17 was not in existence at the time of the decision which was posited on the theory that . . .

    STATE F. LOWE, v. A. NELSON,, 202 So. 2d 232 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

    . . . clearly no analogy between such inquests before a prosecutor and before a grand jury, citing Sections 905.17 . . .

    DOTTY, v. STATE, 197 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

    . . . . §§ 905.17 and 905.19. . . . To give effect to the evident legislative intent in construing F.S.A. §§ 905.17 and 905.19 we construe . . . The legislature in promulgating F.S.A. §§ 905.17 and 905.19 similarly imposed official duties upon prosecuting . . . F.S.A. § 905.17 “Who may be present during sessions of grand jury. . . .

    In FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 196 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 1967)

    . . . (See sec’s 905.16, 905.17, 905.19, 905.22, 27.02, 27.16, 27.21 & 27.22 FS.) . . . the prosecuting attorney cannot be present while the grand jury is deliberating or voting (see sec. 905.17 . . .

    GORDON, v. E. GERSTEIN,, 189 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1966)

    . . . clearly no analogy between such inquests before a prosecutor and before a grand jury citing Sections 905.17 . . .

    STATE v. CLEMMONS, 150 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 1963)

    . . . See Section 905.17 and Section 905.27, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. . . .

    TRAFFICANTE, Jr. v. STATE, 92 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 1957)

    . . . . § 905.17, F.S.A. provides in part that transcriptions of testimony before a grand jury “shall be opened . . .