28.11 DRIVING [WHILE [LICENSE] [DRIVING PRIVILEGE] SUSPENDED, REVOKED OR CANCELED] [OR] [UNDER SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION EQUIVALENT STATUS] WITH KNOWLEDGE

To prove the crime of Driving [While [License] [Driving Privilege] was [Suspended] [Revoked] [Canceled]] [Under Suspension or Revocation Equivalent Status], the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Defendant) drove a motor vehicle upon a highway in this state.

Give as applicable.

2. At that time,

a. [his] [her] [license] [driving privilege] was [suspended] [revoked] [canceled].

b. [he] [she] was under suspension or revocation equivalent status.

Give as applicable.

3. At that time, (defendant) knew that

a. [his] [her] [license] [driving privilege] was [suspended] [revoked] [canceled].

b. [he] [she] was under suspension or revocation equivalent status.

If you find that (defendant) had been previously cited for driving [while license [suspended] [revoked] [canceled] and [his] [her] license had not been reinstated, you may conclude that (defendant) knew of the [suspension] [revocation] [cancellation].

If you find that (defendant) admitted to knowing of the [suspension] [revocation] [cancellation] [suspension or revocation equivalent status], you may conclude that (defendant) knew of the [suspension] [revocation] [cancellation] [suspension or revocation equivalent status].

If you find that (defendant) had received a traffic citation that contained a provision notifying (defendant) that [his] [her] license [had been suspended, revoked, or canceled] [was under suspension or revocation equivalent status], you may conclude that (defendant) knew of the [suspension] [revocation] [cancellation] [suspension or revocation equivalent status].

Do not give if the suspension was for failure to pay a traffic fine or for a financial responsibility violation. See § 322.34(2) and § 322.251(1), (2), Fla. Stat.

If you find that (defendant) had received a [judgment] [order] rendered by [a court] [an adjudicatory body] which contained a provision notifying (defendant) that [his] [her] license had been [suspended] [revoked] [canceled], you may conclude that (defendant) knew of the [suspension] [revocation] [cancellation].

See the Comment section below regarding recidivism issues that do not require any finding other than the fact of a prior conviction.

Give if applicable in a bifurcated proceeding. § 322.34(2)(c), Fla. Stat.

A third or subsequent conviction is a first degree misdemeanor and requires a minimum sentence of 10 days in jail. However, a third or subsequent conviction becomes a third degree felony if the current alleged violation or the most recent prior violation of § 322.34(2), Fla. Stat., are related to and resulted from a violation of an enumerated crime.

Now that you have found the defendant guilty of Driving [While [License] [Driving Privilege] was [Suspended] [Revoked] [Canceled]] [Under Suspension or Revocation Equivalent Status], you must make two further findings.

First, you must determine whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant has two prior convictions for Driving [While [License] [Driving Privilege] was [Suspended] [Revoked] [Canceled]] [Under Suspension or Revocation Equivalent Status]. A “conviction” means a determination of guilt that was the result of a plea or a trial, regardless of whether adjudication was withheld or a plea of nolo contendere was entered.

Second, you must determine whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the current case or the most recent conviction are related to Driving [While [License] [Driving Privilege] was [Suspended] [Revoked] [Canceled]] [Under Suspension or Revocation Equivalent Status] resulting from a violation of [Driving Under the Influence] [Refusal to Submit to a Urine, Breath-Alcohol, or Blood Alcohol test] [a traffic crime that caused death or serious bodily injury] [Fleeing or Eluding].