Fla. Stat. » 90
Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 90.104 (2025)

Rulings on evidence.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes: through the 2025 Regular Session (some sections already show 2026 laws)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
90.104 Rulings on evidence.—
(1) A court may predicate error, set aside or reverse a judgment, or grant a new trial on the basis of admitted or excluded evidence when a substantial right of the party is adversely affected and:
(a) When the ruling is one admitting evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears on the record, stating the specific ground of objection if the specific ground was not apparent from the context; or
(b) When the ruling is one excluding evidence, the substance of the evidence was made known to the court by offer of proof or was apparent from the context within which the questions were asked.

If the court has made a definitive ruling on the record admitting or excluding evidence, either at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal.

(2) In cases tried by a jury, a court shall conduct proceedings, to the maximum extent practicable, in such a manner as to prevent inadmissible evidence from being suggested to the jury by any means.
(3) Nothing in this section shall preclude a court from taking notice of fundamental errors affecting substantial rights, even though such errors were not brought to the attention of the trial judge.
History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379; s. 1, ch. 2003-259.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 169 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Frank Special v. West Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Frank Special v. West Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 2014). · cites it 4× “Section 90.104, Florida Statutes (2009), is also applicable to the instant case.”
Rodgers v. State, 948 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2006). · cites it 4× “2003-259, § 1, at 1298, Laws of Fla. This Court adopted the statute "to the extent that it is procedural" "effective on the date it became law," which was July 1, 2003.”
McWatters v. State, 36 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 2010). · cites it 4× “See § 90.104(1), Fla. Stat. (2004) (providing that pretrial ruling on admissibility of evidence preserves objection for appellate review).”
Franklin v. State, 965 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2007). · cites it 4× “(codified at § 90.104(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2005)). Thus, Franklin was not required to renew his objection to the penalty phase evidence in order to preserve his confrontation claim for appellate review.”
Special v. Baux, 79 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). · cites it 6× “041, section 90.104, Florida Statutes (2009) provides that a court may reverse a judgment or grant a new trial on the basis of admitted or excluded evidence "when a substantial right of the party is adversely affected" and the point is properly preserved in the trial court.”
Murray v. State, 3 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 2009). · cites it 4× “See § 90.104, Fla. Stat. (2003); see also Miller v.”
Richard DeLisle v. Crane Co., 258 So. 3d 1219 (Fla. 2018). · cites it 4× “Since then, we have traditionally continued to adopt the code, to the extent it is procedural, to avoid the issue of whether the Evidence Code is substantive in nature and therefore within the province of the Legislature or procedural in nature and therefore within the province…”
Smith v. State, 998 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2008). · cites it 4× “(2003); In re Amendments to The Florida Evidence Code—Section 90.104, 914 So.2d 940, 941 (Fla.2005).”
Kevan Boyles v. A&G Concrete Pools Inc., 149 So. 3d 39 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). · cites it 12× “Boilerplate motions in limine filed early in a case have dramatically increased in the years since the amendment of section 90.104, Florida Statutes in 2003.”
A. McD. v. State, 422 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). · cites it 7× “The Florida Evidence Code, Section 90.104, Florida Statutes (1979) provides: (1) A court may predicate error, set aside or reverse a judgment, or grant a new trial on the basis of admitted or excluded evidence when a substantial right of the party is adversely affected and: .”
In re Amendments to Evidence Code-Section 90.104, 914 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 2005). · cites it 7× “Next, the Committee explains that it was the position of a number of its members who practice criminal law that the amendment to section 90.104 would reduce the number of motions for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.”
Corona v. State, 64 So. 3d 1232 (Fla. 2011). · cites it 4× “[8] Corona's trial was conducted before the July 1, 2003, effective date of the provision of section 90.104(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2003), that a renewed objection when evidence is offered at trial is not necessary if there has been a prior "definitive ruling" excluding the…”
Show all 169 citing cases →
90.104(1): 41 cases
McWatters v. State, 36 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 2010). “See § 90.104(1), Fla. Stat. (2004) (providing that pretrial ruling on admissibility of evidence preserves objection for appellate review).”
Saleeby v. Rocky Elson Constr., Inc., 3 So. 3d 1078 (Fla. 2009).
Braddy v. State, 111 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 2012).
Wheeler v. State, 4 So. 3d 599 (Fla. 2009).
Advanced Chiropractic & Rehab. Ctr., Corp. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 103 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
90.104(1)(a): 26 cases
Filan v. State, 768 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
Midtown Enter., Inc. v. Local Contractors, Inc., 785 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).
Marshall v. State, 915 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
Huck v. State, 881 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
Parker v. State, 456 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 1984).
90.104(1)(b): 51 cases
Franklin v. State, 965 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2007). “(codified at § 90.104(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2005)). Thus, Franklin was not required to renew his objection to the penalty phase evidence in order to preserve his confrontation claim for appellate review.”
Corona v. State, 64 So. 3d 1232 (Fla. 2011). “[8] Corona's trial was conducted before the July 1, 2003, effective date of the provision of section 90.104(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2003), that a renewed objection when evidence is offered at trial is not necessary if there has been a prior "definitive ruling" excluding the…”
In re Amendments to Evidence Code-Section 90.104, 914 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 2005). “Next, the Committee explains that it was the position of a number of its members who practice criminal law that the amendment to section 90.104 would reduce the number of motions for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.”
Rodgers v. State, 948 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2006). “2003-259, § 1, at 1298, Laws of Fla. This Court adopted the statute "to the extent that it is procedural" "effective on the date it became law," which was July 1, 2003.”
Smith v. State, 998 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2008). “(2003); In re Amendments to The Florida Evidence Code—Section 90.104, 914 So.2d 940, 941 (Fla.2005).”
90.104(2): 8 cases
Marcus Jamal Graham v. State of Florida, 207 So. 3d 135 (Fla. 2016).
Lee v. State, 264 So. 3d 225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
Suarez-Burgos v. Morhaim, 745 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Grant v. State, 764 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Cruz v. State, 593 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).
90.104(3): 5 cases
A. McD. v. State, 422 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). “The Florida Evidence Code, Section 90.104, Florida Statutes (1979) provides: (1) A court may predicate error, set aside or reverse a judgment, or grant a new trial on the basis of admitted or excluded evidence when a substantial right of the party is adversely affected and: .”
Advanced Chiropractic & Rehab. Ctr., Corp. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 103 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
Johnson v. State, 460 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).
Assiag v. State, 565 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
Roger N. Rosier v. State of Florida, 276 So. 3d 403 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).
90.104(b): 1 case
Dunston v. State, 913 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).
90.104(l)(a): 4 cases
Montes-Valeton v. State, 141 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
Padilla v. BIV Investments & Mgmt., Inc., 783 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).
Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Merch., 652 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).
Utianski v. Ewing, 545 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
90.104(l)(b): 16 cases
Kevan Boyles v. A&G Concrete Pools Inc., 149 So. 3d 39 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). “Boilerplate motions in limine filed early in a case have dramatically increased in the years since the amendment of section 90.104, Florida Statutes in 2003.”
Collins v. State, 211 So. 3d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
Ocwen Fin. Corp. v. Kidder, 950 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Garrido, 22 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).
Persaud v. State, 755 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
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 this site's author, a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.