Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 90.951 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 90.951 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 90.951 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 90.951

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title VII
EVIDENCE
Chapter 90
EVIDENCE CODE
View Entire Chapter
90.951 Definitions.For purposes of this chapter:
(1) “Writings” and “recordings” include letters, words, or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photography, magnetic impulse, mechanical or electronic recording, or other form of data compilation, upon paper, wood, stone, recording tape, or other materials.
(2) “Photographs” include still photographs, X-ray films, videotapes, and motion pictures.
(3) An “original” of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself, or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. An “original” of a photograph includes the negative or any print made from it. If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight and shown to reflect the data accurately is an “original.”
(4) “Duplicate” includes:
(a) A counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, from the same matrix; by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures; by mechanical or electronic rerecording; by chemical reproduction; or by other equivalent technique that accurately reproduces the original; or
(b) An executed carbon copy not intended by the parties to be an original.
History.s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379.

F.S. 90.951 on Google Scholar

F.S. 90.951 on CourtListener

Amendments to 90.951


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 90.951

Total Results: 10  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Cave v. State, 660 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1995).

Cited 27 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1995 WL 555315

...as assistant state attorney, had delivered document to prosecutor during previous trial and was supervisor of division that prosecuted defendant). [6] Photographic evidence consists of still photographs, X-ray films, videotapes, and motion pictures. § 90.951(2) Fla....
Copy

Bryant v. State, 810 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

Cited 7 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2002 WL 100414

..."The rule governing admissibility into evidence of photographs applies with equal force to the admission of motion pictures and video tapes. Grant v. State, *536 171 So.2d 361 (Fla.1965)." Paramore v. State, 229 So.2d 855, 859 (Fla.1969), vacated as to sentence only, 408 U.S. 935, 92 S.Ct. 2857, 33 L.Ed.2d 751 (1972); see § 90.951(2), Fla....
...A duplicate is defined as: A counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, from the same matrix; by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures; by mechanical or electronic rerecording; by chemical reproduction; or by equivalent technique that accurately reproduces the original.... § 90.951(4)(a), Fla....
Copy

Andre v. Castor, 963 F. Supp. 1158 (M.D. Fla. 1997).

Cited 5 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5189, 1997 WL 189100

...a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original"), 1004 (carving out another exception to the general rule by deeming admissible "other evidence of the contents of a ... photograph" when the party against whom the photograph will be offered is under the control of the original); Fla. Stat. § 90.951-.954 (essentially the same as the above-recited federal rules)....
Copy

Van Den Borre v. State, 596 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 548, 1992 WL 12174

...[5] However, it is well settled that a trial judge can be right for the wrong reason. Applegate v. Barnett Bank, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1950). WAIVER OF DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY A "FAX" and a photocopy are duplicates of the original "writings" and "recordings." § 90.951(4)(a), Fla....
Copy

Garcia v. Lopez, 483 So. 2d 470 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986).

Cited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 422, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6503

...The Lopezes contend that the copy is not an accurate reproduction of the original because the signature of Elsa appears not as a copy, but as an original signature. Because the copy is not an accurate reproduction, they say, it is not a “duplicate” within the meaning of section 90.951(4)(a), and, therefore, cannot be admitted under section 90.953, which provides for the admission of duplicates....
Copy

H.A. v. State, 24 So. 3d 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).

Cited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 20393

...We disagree. Section 90.953 provides that duplicates are admissible “to the same extent as an original” unless a genuine question is raised about the authenticity of the original or it would be unfair under the circumstances to admit the duplicates. Section 90.951(4)(a) defines a duplicate as: “A counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, from the same matrix; by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures ....” (emphasis added)....
Copy

HA v. State, 24 So. 3d 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).

Cited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2009 WL 5125101

...We disagree. Section 90.953 provides that duplicates are admissible "to the same extent as an original" unless a genuine question is raised about the authenticity of the original or it would be unfair under the circumstances to admit the duplicates. Section 90.951(4)(a) defines a duplicate as: "A counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, from the same matrix; by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures...." (emphasis added)....
Copy

Tillman v. Smith, 472 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1824, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14481

...The purpose of section 90.953 was not to restrict the rules of admissibility of duplicates, but to liberalize them. “The effect of this section, which is applicable only if the duplicate is produced by a method which insures accuracy and genuineness, see § 90.951(4), is to save time and expense previously wasted on producing the original when an equally reliable counterpart is at hand.” Law Revision Council Note, 6C....
Copy

Fredericks v. Howell, 426 So. 2d 1200 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19030

not intended by the parties to be an original. § 90.951(4), Fla.Stat. (1981). In the case at bar, the
Copy

O'Neal v. Bolling, 409 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).

Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19283

...Affirmed in part; reversed in part, and remanded for trial. 1 . Since the case is remanded for trial, we note for the future guidance of the trial court that Mrs. Bolling’s recently-fashioned typed likenesses of the $2,800 and $20,000 promissory notes are not duplicates as defined by Section 90.951(4), Florida Statutes (1981)....

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.