Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 784.048 (2025)
Stalking; definitions; penalties.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes: current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
784.048 Stalking; definitions; penalties.—
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
(b) “Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose. The term does not include constitutionally protected activity such as picketing or other organized protests.
(c) “Credible threat” means a verbal or nonverbal threat, or a combination of the two, including threats delivered by electronic communication or implied by a pattern of conduct, which places the person who is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family members or individuals closely associated with the person, and which is made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat to cause such harm. It is not necessary to prove that the person making the threat had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present incarceration of the person making the threat is not a bar to prosecution under this section.
(d) “Cyberstalk” means:
1. To engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, directly or indirectly, words, images, or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at or pertaining to a specific person; or
2. To access, or attempt to access, the online accounts or Internet-connected home electronic systems of another person without that person’s permission,
causing substantial emotional distress to that person and serving no legitimate purpose.
(2) A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person and makes a credible threat to that person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(4) A person who, after an injunction for protection against repeat violence, sexual violence, or dating violence pursuant to s. 784.046, or an injunction for protection against domestic violence pursuant to s. 741.30, or after any other court-imposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person or that person’s property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(5) A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks a child under 16 years of age commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(6) A law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, any person that he or she has probable cause to believe has violated this section.
(7) A person who, after having been sentenced for a violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, or s. 847.0135(5) and prohibited from contacting the victim of the offense under s. 921.244, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks the victim commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(8) The punishment imposed under this section shall run consecutive to any former sentence imposed for a conviction for any offense under s. 794.011, s. 800.04, or s. 847.0135(5).
(9)(a) The sentencing court shall consider, as a part of any sentence, issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim, which may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. It is the intent of the Legislature that the length of any such order be based upon the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations by the perpetrator, and the safety of the victim and his or her family members or individuals closely associated with the victim.
(b) The order may be issued by the court even if the defendant is sentenced to a state prison or a county jail or even if the imposition of the sentence is suspended and the defendant is placed on probation.
History.—s. 1, ch. 92-208; s. 29, ch. 94-134; s. 29, ch. 94-135; s. 2, ch. 97-27; s. 23, ch. 2002-55; s. 1, ch. 2003-23; s. 3, ch. 2004-17; s. 3, ch. 2004-256; s. 17, ch. 2008-172; s. 2, ch. 2012-153; s. 31, ch. 2019-167; s. 1, ch. 2021-220.
Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 784.048
M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd§784.048(2)STALKINGFOLLOW HARASS CYBERSTALK ANOTHER
§784.048(3)AGGRAV STALKINGFOLLOW HARASS CYBERSTALK CRED THREAT TO PERSON
§784.048(4)AGGRAV STALKINGFOLLOW HARASS CYBERSTALK AFTER INJUNCTION
§784.048(5)AGGRAV STALKINGAGGRAV STALKING OF CHILD LT 16 YOA
§784.048(7)AGGRAV STALKINGSTALKING VICTIM AFTER NO CONTACT ORDER
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 262
cases (46 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Pickett v. Copeland, 236 So. 3d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
Pickett v. Copeland, 236 So. 3d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “Stalking is defined simply as "willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly" following, harassing, or cyberstalking another person-not repeatedly stalking another person. § 784.048(2), Fla.”
Pallas v. State, 636 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). “" Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests. (c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety.”
Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). “" The stalking statute, section 784.048, was enacted by Chapter 92-208, Laws of Florida.”
Bouters v. State, 659 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1995). “30, or after any other courtimposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person or that person's property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree,…”
Alkiviades A. David v. John Textor, 189 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “Additionally, section 784.048 defines stalking, including cyberstalking: (a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.”
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “6 STALKING § 784.048(2), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Stalking, the State must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt: (Defendant) willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly [followed] [harassed] [or] [cyberstalked] (victim).”
Burroughs v. Corey, 92 F. Supp. 3d 1201 (M.D. Fla. 2015). “Thus, she has filed a facial challenge to the constitutionality of Florida’s stalking statute, Fla. Stat. § 784.048 . Burroughs filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin Defendants, the State Attorney and the Sheriff, from enforcing the statute.”
United States v. Malmsberry, 222 F. Supp. 2d 1345 (M.D. Fla. 2002). “48] alleging that Malmsberry had violated the terms of his supervised release as'follows: On or about February 4, 2001, Shawn Malmsberry committed the offense of Aggravated Stalking [as to Susan Bol-linger and Jason Bollinger in violation of Fla. Stat. § 784.048 (3) ] in Osceola…”
Packal v. Johnson, 226 So. 3d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). “*339 § 784.048(1)(a). 2 Accordingly, we reverse the injunction.”
Seese v. State, 955 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “7 (§ 784.048, aggravated stalking); and 29.12 (§ 877.”
Lukacs v. Luton, 982 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). “As defined in section 784.048, Florida Statutes (2006), stalking requires the State to prove that a person committed repeated acts of following or harassment.”
Michael Paulson v. Sarah Rankart, 251 So. 3d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “” § 784.048(1)(a), Fla. Stat. A “course of conduct” is “a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose.”
784.048(1): 14 cases
Alkiviades A. David v. John Textor, 189 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “Additionally, section 784.048 defines stalking, including cyberstalking: (a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.”
Butler v. State, 715 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
Slack v. Kling, 959 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
State v. Wheeler, 745 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Weightman v. State, 990 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008).
784.048(1)(a): 68 cases
Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). “" The stalking statute, section 784.048, was enacted by Chapter 92-208, Laws of Florida.”
Pickett v. Copeland, 236 So. 3d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “Stalking is defined simply as "willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly" following, harassing, or cyberstalking another person-not repeatedly stalking another person. § 784.048(2), Fla.”
Pallas v. State, 636 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). “" Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests. (c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety.”
Lisa Venn v. Kenneth M. Fowlkes, III, 257 So. 3d 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
Joseph Klenk v. Jessica Ransom, 270 So. 3d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).
784.048(1)(b): 46 cases
Pickett v. Copeland, 236 So. 3d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “Stalking is defined simply as "willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly" following, harassing, or cyberstalking another person-not repeatedly stalking another person. § 784.048(2), Fla.”
Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). “" The stalking statute, section 784.048, was enacted by Chapter 92-208, Laws of Florida.”
Michael Paulson v. Sarah Rankart, 251 So. 3d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “” § 784.048(1)(a), Fla. Stat. A “course of conduct” is “a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose.”
Eichelberger v. State, 949 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
Lukacs v. Luton, 982 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). “As defined in section 784.048, Florida Statutes (2006), stalking requires the State to prove that a person committed repeated acts of following or harassment.”
784.048(1)(c): 5 cases
Pallas v. State, 636 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). “" Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests. (c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety.”
Menefee v. State, 980 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008).
St. Fort v. State, 943 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).
Raulerson v. Font (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).
784.048(1)(d): 17 cases
Patrick A. Neptune v. Philip Lanoue, 178 So. 3d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).
Robinson v. Robinson, 257 So. 3d 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018).
Ashley Ann Krapacs v. Nisha E. Bacchus (Fla. 4th DCA 2020).
Brittany Budlove v. William Johnson (Fla. 2d DCA 2023).
784.048(2): 105 cases
Pickett v. Copeland, 236 So. 3d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “Stalking is defined simply as "willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly" following, harassing, or cyberstalking another person-not repeatedly stalking another person. § 784.048(2), Fla.”
Packal v. Johnson, 226 So. 3d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). “*339 § 784.048(1)(a). 2 Accordingly, we reverse the injunction.”
Slack v. Kling, 959 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
Joseph Lawrence O'Neill v. Sara Skye Goodwin, 195 So. 3d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).
Lisa Venn v. Kenneth M. Fowlkes, III, 257 So. 3d 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
784.048(3): 31 cases
Pallas v. State, 636 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). “" Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests. (c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety.”
Bouters v. State, 659 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1995). “30, or after any other courtimposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person or that person's property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree,…”
Kenneth B. Wills & Bobbie Akins v. Rashida Wills Jones, 213 So. 3d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
Bouters v. State, 634 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “6 STALKING § 784.048(2), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Stalking, the State must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt: (Defendant) willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly [followed] [harassed] [or] [cyberstalked] (victim).”
784.048(4): 43 cases
Seese v. State, 955 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “7 (§ 784.048, aggravated stalking); and 29.12 (§ 877.”
Curry v. State, 811 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). “" The stalking statute, section 784.048, was enacted by Chapter 92-208, Laws of Florida.”
State v. Johnson, 676 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 1996).
Bouters v. State, 659 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1995). “30, or after any other courtimposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person or that person's property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree,…”
Eichelberger v. State, 949 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
784.048(5): 7 cases
In Re Stand. Jury Inst.-Crim. Cases, 765 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 2000).
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “6 STALKING § 784.048(2), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Stalking, the State must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt: (Defendant) willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly [followed] [harassed] [or] [cyberstalked] (victim).”
State of Florida v. Frank A. Mosley, 149 So. 3d 684 (Fla. 2014).
Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-No. 2005-1, 953 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2007).
H.L.D. v. State, 83 So. 3d 750 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).
784.048(7): 5 cases
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “6 STALKING § 784.048(2), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Stalking, the State must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt: (Defendant) willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly [followed] [harassed] [or] [cyberstalked] (victim).”
Rondan Keith v. State of Florida (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
Keith v. State, 264 So. 3d 1151 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
Keith v. State, 264 So. 3d 1151 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
784.048(l)(a): 34 cases
Kenneth B. Wills & Bobbie Akins v. Rashida Wills Jones, 213 So. 3d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
Touhey v. Seda, 133 So. 3d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).
Leach v. Kersey, 162 So. 3d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).
Joseph Lawrence O'Neill v. Sara Skye Goodwin, 195 So. 3d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).
James Thoma v. Tamekia O'Neal, 180 So. 3d 1157 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).
784.048(l)(b): 20 cases
Alkiviades A. David v. John Textor, 189 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “Additionally, section 784.048 defines stalking, including cyberstalking: (a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.”
James Thoma v. Tamekia O'Neal, 180 So. 3d 1157 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).
In re Stand. Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases-Report No. 2012-05, 131 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2013). “6 STALKING § 784.048(2), Fla. Stat. To prove the crime of Stalking, the State must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt: (Defendant) willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly [followed] [harassed] [or] [cyberstalked] (victim).”
Klemple v. Gagliano, 197 So. 3d 1283 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).
Packal v. Johnson, 226 So. 3d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). “*339 § 784.048(1)(a). 2 Accordingly, we reverse the injunction.”
784.048(l)(c): 2 cases
Preston v. State, 134 So. 3d 992 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
Spipniewski v. State, 134 So. 3d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
784.048(l)(d): 9 cases
Horowitz v. Horowitz, 160 So. 3d 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).
Murphy v. Reynolds, 55 So. 3d 716 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
Chevaldina v. R.K./FL Mgmt., Inc., 133 So. 3d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
Scott v. Blum, 191 So. 3d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016).
Leach v. Kersey, 162 So. 3d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).
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.