CopyPublished | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2008 WL 463243
...083." These sections define the penalty: a maximum of one-year imprisonment and a fine of no more than $1,000. There is no reference in section
106.15 to section
775.15. Day argued below and again asserts on appeal that the statute of limitations in section
106.28, Florida Statutes (2002), which he contends governs the charges in counts III-VI and VIII-XIII, has expired. Section
106.28, Florida Statutes, provides: Actions for violation of this chapter must be commenced before 2 years have elapsed from the date of the violation. The State responds that section
106.28 does not apply to this criminal prosecution; rather, section
775.15, Florida Statutes (2004), which contains the general criminal statutes of limitation, governs and, under its provisions, particularly subsection 3(b), the prosecution of all charges in this case was timely. The State suggests that section
106.28 applies to civil claims only and that interpreting the statutes as such, would enable the lower court to "reconcile" both "conflicting" statutory provisions....
...ffice or employment, within 2 years from the time he or she leaves public office or employment, or during any time permitted by any other part of this section, whichever time is greater. Thus, the question presented is whether the time limitation in section
106.28 or in section
775.15 applies to a charge of violation of section
106.15. The State's position is that because there is a statute of limitations applicable generally to first degree misdemeanors in section
775.15, we must apply the limitation contained in section
106.28 only to civil proceedings in order to "harmonize" conflicting statutes....
...Second, the Legislature knows how to direct the application of section
775.15 in a comprehensive legislative enactment that contains specially created criminal offenses. This was not done in chapter 106. Although we do not credit the State's "harmony" argument, we have considered carefully the State's proposition that section
106.28 is supposed to apply only to civil proceedings arising under chapter 106. We have done so because of the language the Legislature chose to use in section
106.28: "Actions for violation of this chapter must be commenced before 2 years have elapsed from the date of the violation." The Legislature's use of the word "actions" rather than "prosecutions" and absence of the word "criminal" makes the State's argument viable....
...n
106.25(6), where there is a reference to "criminal or civil actions." The second appears in section
106.27, where, in reference to "criminal proceedings," the Legislature calls this "any such action." There is, therefore, no basis to conclude that section
106.28 only applies to civil violations created in chapter 106....
...We conclude, therefore, that both criminal and civil actions for violations of provisions of chapter 106, including section
106.15, are governed by a two-year statute of limitations, commencing on the date of the violation. Because the two-year statute of limitations in section
106.28 applies and the record fails to show that any of the misdemeanor offenses brought under chapter 106 were committed within the statutory time period, they must be dismissed and *667 the defendant resentenced accordingly....
