HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS
BILL #: HB 601 Complaints Against Law Enforcement and Correctional Officers
SPONSOR(S): Duggan and others
TIED BILLS: IDEN./SIM. BILLS:
REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR or
BUDGET/POLICY CHIEF
1) Criminal Justice Subcommittee 14 Y, 3 N Padgett Hall
2) Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special 11 Y, 4 N Roy Darden
Districts Subcommittee
3) Judiciary Committee 16 Y, 3 N Padgett Kramer
SUMMARY ANALYSIS
Generally, a civilian oversight agency (COA) is a governmental entity created by a county or municipality to provide
external oversight of a law enforcement agency that is comprised of citizens who are not sworn law enforcement
officers. The structure, duties, and budgets of COAs are determined by the establishing governmental body and
may vary widely. The most complex COAs employ their own investigators who conduct independ ent investigations
into law enforcement officer misconduct parallel to any internal investigation conducted by a law enforcement
agency and, if an allegation of misconduct is verified, make recommendations of specific disciplinary measures.
Conversely, other COAs are limited to reviewing the results of misconduct investigations conducted by the related
law enforcement agency and making advisory recommendations.
Under current law, there is no statute that explicitly authorizes a local government to create a COA, nor is there any
statute that provides standards relating to the structure, duties, powers, and membership of a COA. However, the
Florida Supreme Court (FSC) has held the provisions in the Law Enforcement Officer’s Bill of Rights in ch. 112, part
IV, F.S., governing the receipt and processing of misconduct complaints are so expansive that they preempt an
external entity such as a COA from using subpoena power to conduct an independent investigation into misconduct
complaints against law enforcement or correctional officers by compelling such officers to appear before the COA
for questioning. The FSC’s holding did not interpret Florida law to prohibit a COA from issuing subpoenas to non -law
enforcement officers, and also noted that a COA could still provide oversight over a law enforcement agency by
reviewing all investigatory materials from an agency’s internal misconduct investigation once an investigation has
concluded since such materials become public record.
HB 601 creates s. 112.5331, F.S., to provide that it is the intent of the Legislature that the receipt, processing, and
investigation of complaints against law enforcement officers and correctional officers, and the rights and privileges
afforded to such officers while under investigation, apply uniformly throughout the state. The bill prohibits a county,
municipality, special district, or other political subdivision of the state from passing or enforcing any ordinance,
resolution, or rule relating to:
The receipt, processing, or investigation of complaints of misconduct by law enforcement officers and
correctional officers, except as expressly provided in s. 112.5331, F.S.; or
Civilian oversight of a law enforcement agency in relation to the investigation of complaints of misconduct by
law enforcement officers and correctional officers.
Thus, any COA that is currently performing such oversight functions related to the investigation of complaints of
misconduct would be prohibited from continuing to do so after July 1, 2024. The bill does not eliminate or restrict
misconduct investigations by an officer’s employing agency, the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission,
or criminal investigations arising out of such misconduct by a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency.
The bill prohibits local governments from passing specified ordinances, resolutions, or rules relating to the civilian
oversight of misconduct complaints against law enforcement and correctional officers. To the extent that local
governments are currently expending funds investigating complaints of misconduct against law enforcement officers
and correctional officers, there may be a negative fiscal impact to local government expenditures since the bill
prohibits local governments from continuing to conduct such investigations.
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.
This docum ent does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill sponsor or House of Representatives .
STORAGE NAME: h0601e.JDC
DATE: 2/7/2024
FULL ANALYSIS
I. SUBSTANTIVE ANALYSIS
A. EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES:
Background
Law Enforcement Officers – Misconduct Investigations
Internal Affairs
Generally, a formal investigation into misconduct by a law enforcement officer or correctional officer is
initiated by a complaint filed with the officer’s employing agency. 1 Depending on the nature of the
complaint, an allegation of misconduct may either be investigated by an officer’s supervisor or, in more
serious cases, by the internal affairs division of the agency. 2 After the investigation is complete, the
complaint is forwarded to the head of the law enforcement agency for final disposition, which, if the
allegations in the complaint are sustained, could include disciplinary action. 3 A misconduct complaint
and all information obtained pursuant to the agency’s internal investigation of such complaint are
exempt from public disclosure under s. 119.07(1), F.S.,4 until the investigation ceases to be active, or
until the agency head or the agency head’s designee provides written notice to the officer who is the
subject of the complaint that the agency has concluded the investigation and made a final
determination as to whether the agency will proceed with disciplinary action against an officer. 5
Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission
The Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission (CJSTC) was established within the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement for the purpose of ensuring criminal justice officers in Florida are
ethical, qualified, and well-trained.6 Among its duties, the CJSTC is responsible for certifying and, when
warranted, revoking the certification of law enforcement officers, correctional officers, and correctional
probation officers.7 The CJSTC may initiate an officer misconduct case following:
A law enforcement agency’s internal investigation that sustains an allegation of misconduct
against an officer;
An officer’s separation from employment if misconduct was the reason for separation from
employment;
Notification of an officer’s arrest;
Receipt of a verifiable complaint from a citizen alleging misconduct; or
An order by the Governor.8
If the CJSTC determines that probable cause exists that an officer committed misconduct, the CJSTC
may discipline the officer by issuing a written reprimand, placing the officer’s certification on probation
for up to two years, suspending the officer’s certification for up to two years, or revoking the officer’s
certification.9
Criminal Prosecution
1 Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office, Commendation & Complaint Procedures, https://www.pcsoweb.com/Data/Sites/1/media/extra-
pdf/commendation_and_complaint_procedures-pages.pdf (last visited Feb. 7, 2024). Tallahassee Police Department, General Order
29, https://www.talgov.com/uploads/public/documents/tpd/policies/go -29.pdf (last visited Feb. 7, 2024).
2 Id.
3 Id.
4 Section 119.07, F.S., generally authorizes the release of records held by the government to the public.
5 S. 112.533(2)(a), F.S.
6 Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission,
https://www.fdle.state.fl.us/CJSTC/Commission.aspx (last visited Feb. 7, 2024).
7 S. 943.12(3), F.S. Generally, a person must be certified by the CJSTC to be employed as a law enforcement officer, correction al
officer, or correctional probation officer in Florida. S. 943.13, F.S.
8 Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Florida’s Criminal Justice Professional Compliance Process,
https://www.fdle.state.fl.us/CJSTC/Documents/Publications/Professional -Compliance-Process.aspx (last visited Feb. 7, 2024).
9 Id.
STORAGE NAME: h0601e.JDC PAGE: 2
DATE: 2/7/2024
If a law enforcement or correctional officer’s misconduct is severe enough to implicate a criminal law
violation, the officer may be investigated by a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency and
referred for criminal prosecution at any time.10
Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights
Law enforcement officers and correctional officers are provided with specified rights when they are
being investigated for misconduct by their own agencies. Chapter 112, part VI, F.S., commonly known
as the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights (LEOBOR), provides specific rights when a law
enforcement officer11 or correctional officer12 is under investigation and subject to interrogation by
members of his or her agency for any reason that could lead to disciplinary action, suspension,
demotion, or dismissal. LEOBOR prescribes the conditions under which an interrogation of an officer
must be conducted, including limitations on the time, place, manner, and length of the interrogation, as
well as restrictions on the interrogation techniques that may be employed.13 LEOBOR further affords
officers the right to:
Be informed of the nature of the investigation;
Be provided with all evidence against the officer before any interrogation;
Counsel during any interrogation;
Have the interrogation recorded;
A complete copy of the investigative file;
Be notified of the reason for disciplinary action before it is imposed; and
Address the findings in the investigative file with the employing agency before disciplinary action
is imposed.14
In addition to providing a law enforcement officer or correctional officer with a list of rights that may be
exercised while he or she is being investigated for misconduct by an agency, LEOBOR also requires
every law enforcement agency and correctional agency to establish and put into operation a system for
the receipt, investigation, and determination of misconduct complaints received by such agency from
any person.15 Under LEOBOR, such a system “shall be” the procedure for investigating a complaint
against a law enforcement or correctional officer and for determining whether to proceed with
disciplinary action or to file disciplinary charges, notwithstanding any other law or ordinance to the
contrary.16
Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement Agencies
Generally
Generally, a civilian oversight agency (COA) is a governmental entity created by a county or
municipality to provide external oversight of a law enforcement agency that is comprised of citizens
who are not sworn law enforcement officers.17 The structure, duties, and budgets of COAs are
10 S. 112.532(1)(j), F.S.
11 “Law enforcement officer” is defined as any person, other than a chief of police, who is employed full time by any municipality or th e
state or any political subdivision thereof and whose primary responsibility is the prevention and detection of crime or the e nforcement of
the penal, traffic, or highway laws of this state; and includes any person who is appointed by the sheriff as a deputy sherif f pursuant to
s. 30.07, F.S. S. 112.531(3), F.S.
12 “Correctional officer” is defined as any person, other than a warden, who is appointed or employed full time by the state or any
political subdivision thereof whose primary responsibility is the supervision, protection, care, custody, or control of inmat es within a
correctional institution; and includes correctional probation officers, as defined in s. 943.10(3), F.S. However, the term “correctional
officer” does not include any secretarial, clerical, or professionally trained personnel. S. 112.531(2), F.S.
13 S. 112.532(1), F.S.
14 S. 112.532(1) and (4), F.S.
15 S. 112.533(1)(a), F.S.
16 Id.
17 James E. Wright, Improving Police-Community Relations: The Role of Civilian Oversight Agencies in Florida , LeRoy Collins Institute,
https://lci.fsu.edu//wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2022/08/FINAL-Improving-Police-Community-Relations_-The-Role-of-Civilian-Oversight-
Agencies-COA-in-Florida.pdf (last visited Feb. 7, 2024).
STORAGE NAME: h0601e.JDC PAGE: 3
DATE: 2/7/2024
determined by the establishing governmental body and may vary widely.18 The most complex COAs
employ their own investigators who conduct independent investigations into law enforcement officer
misconduct parallel to any internal investigation conducted by a law enforcement agency and, if an
allegation of misconduct is verified, make recommendations of specific disciplinary measures. 19
Conversely, other COAs are limited to reviewing the results of misconduct investigations conducted by
the related law enforcement agency and making advisory recommendations. 20
Florida
According to a December 2021 report by the LeRoy Collins Institute, there are 21 COAs operating in
Florida.21 However, because there is not a formal definition of what constitutes a COA, the exact
number of COAs currently in operating in Florida is unclear.22 Under current law, there is no statute that
explicitly authorizes a local government to create a COA, nor is there any statute that provides
standards relating to the structure, duties, powers, and membership of a COA. However, the Florida
Supreme Court (FSC) has held the provisions in LEOBOR governing the receipt and processing of
misconduct complaints are so expansive that they preempt an external entity such as a COA from
using subpoena power to conduct an independent investigation into misconduct com plaints against law
enforcement or correctional officers by compelling such officers to appear before the COA for
questioning.23 The FSC’s holding did not interpret Florida law to prohibit a COA issuing subpoenas to
non-law enforcement officers, and also noted that a COA could still provide oversight over a law
enforcement agency by reviewing all investigatory materials from such agency’s internal misconduct
investigation once an investigation has concluded since such materials become public record. 24
Effect of Proposed Changes
HB 601 creates s. 112.5331, F.S., to provide that it is the intent of the Legislature that the receipt,
processing, and investigation of complaints against law enforcement officers and correctional officers,
and the rights and privileges afforded to such officers while under investigation, apply uniformly
throughout the state. The bill prohibits a county, municipality, special district, or other political
subdivision of the state from passing or enforcing any ordinance, resolution, or rule relating to:
The receipt, processing, or investigation of complaints of misconduct by law enforcement
officers and correctional officers, except as expressly provided in s. 112.5331, F.S.; or
Civilian oversight of a law enforcement agency in relation to the investigation of complaints of
misconduct by law enforcement officers and correctional officers.
Thus, any COA that is currently performing such oversight functions related to the investigation of
complaints of misconduct would be prohibited from continuing to do so after July 1, 2024. The bill does
not eliminate or restrict misconduct investigations by an officer’s employing agency, the CJSTC, or
criminal investigations arising out of such misconduct by a local, state, or federal law enforcement
agency.
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.
B. SECTION DIRECTORY:
Section 1: Creates s. 112.5331, F.S., relating to preemption to the state.
18
U.S. Department of Justice, Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation, https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/ 184430.pdf
(last visited Feb. 7, 2024).
19 Id.
20 Id.
21 As of December 2021, the following cities in Florida have an operational COA: Bradenton, Daytona Beach, Delray Beach, Fort
Lauderdale, Fort Myers, Fort Pierce, Gainesville, Key West, Kissimmee, Lakeland, Miami, North Miami, North Miami Beach, Ocoee,
Orlando, Pensacola, St. Petersburg, Tallahassee, Tampa, West Palm Beach, and Winter Haven. James E. Wright, supra note 7.
22 Many local governments and law enforcement agencies have created citizen advisory groups to provide broad operational
recommendations relating to law enforcement agencies rather than to review specific issues of misconduct. If such advisory gr oups are
deemed to provide sufficient “oversight” to be classified as a COA, the number of COAs in Florida would be higher than the number
listed in the December 2021 report.
23 D’Agastino v. City of Miami, 220 So. 3d 410 (Fla. 2017).
24 Id. at 427.
STORAGE NAME: h0601e.JDC PAGE: 4
DATE: 2/7/2024
Section 2: Provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.
II. FISCAL ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT
A. FISCAL IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT:
1. Revenues: