FL · jury_instructions
Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 2.8
RECORDED INTERVIEW (EFFECT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT STATEMENTS ON THE DEFENDANT)
Police opinions and statements regarding guilt are generally inadmissible and must be redacted from recordings introduced into evidence unless redaction would render the defendant’s relevant admissions incomprehensible. If a recorded interview cannot be appropriately redacted, the trial judge must, upon request, give the following limiting instruction immediately before the recorded interview is played for the jury.
You are about to [hear] [watch] a recorded interview that contains opinions and statements by (name of law enforcement officer(s)) to (defendant). These opinions and statements are pertinent only to explain the reactions and responses they elicit. You are not to consider these opinions and statements by the police officer as true, but only to establish the context of (defendant’s) reactions and responses.
Jackson v. State, 107 So. 3d 328 (Fla. 2012); Sheppard v. State, 151 So. 3d 1154 (Fla. 2014); Dubria v. Smith, 224 F.3d 995 (9th Cir. 2000); Jackson v. State, 18 So. 3d 1016 (Fla. 2009); and McWatters v. State, 36 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 2010).
Provenance
- Source
- floridabar.org
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-18
- Edition
- 2026-08-18
- Content hash
43755de715b00e32aafc73ea2aafff3514613c3089e719d99f81b69054c34515
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.