“Guilty Mind” No More: Florida Supreme Court Declares Strict Liability Drug Law Constitutional

By: John Guidry

The Florida Supreme Court just issued a 48-page opinion finding Chapter 893 (Florida’s Drug Law) constitutional. The Case: State v. Adkins, SC11-1878 (Fla. 2012). The Verdict: That’s bad for anyone who respects freedom and liberty.

What Just Happened? Well, a little history should help ease the pain. This story began with the Shelton case, a Federal opinion that found our drug laws unconstitutional because the Florida Legislature eliminated the “Guilty Mind” (Mens Rea) requirement.

• The Hope: A judge in Miami (Judge Hirsch) found Shelton persuasive and dismissed 46 drug cases.
• The Reality: The State appealed those dismissals, and the Florida Supreme Court has now crushed that hope.

Did the police find drugs in your car that you didn’t know about?

The burden is now on YOU to prove it. Call John today at (407) 423-1117.

The Ruling: The Legislature Has “Broad Discretion”

The Majority Opinion had no problem upholding Chapter 893. They noted that the Legislature has “broad discretion” to omit a mens rea element from a criminal offense.

• The Logic: They quoted State v. Gray (1983), stating the Legislature may punish conduct without regard to the mental attitude of the offender.
• The Distinction: The Court distinguished this from Lambert v. California (where a felon failed to register just by being in LA). They argued that Lambert punished “passive” conduct, whereas drug possession is an “affirmative act.”

The “Safety Valve”: How does the Court justify punishing innocent people? They argue there is no concern that “entirely innocent conduct” will be punished because defendants are entitled to raise the Affirmative Defense of “absence of knowledge.”

• Translation: You are guilty by default, but you are allowed to prove you are innocent.

Judge Pariente’s Concurrence: We Are the Minority

Judge Pariente wrote a concurring opinion that highlights just how extreme Florida is:

“Forty-eight states… require that knowledge of a controlled substance–mens rea (‘guilty mind’)–be an element of a criminal narcotics offense… Being one among a distinct minority… does not, of course, render Florida’s drug law unconstitutional.”

She justifies the decision by noting that the State still bears the burden of proving the defendant’s knowledge of the presence of the substance.

• Key Takeaway: The State must prove you knew the item was there (e.g., you knew the bag was in your trunk). They just don’t have to prove you knew the item was cocaine.

John’s 2026 Update: The “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” Reality

Note: In 2012, this ruling was a shock. In 2026, it is the standard operating procedure.

1. The Federal Reversal (Shelton is Dead) After Adkins, the Federal Appeals Court (11th Circuit) also reversed the Shelton decision.

• The Law: Both State and Federal courts now agree: Florida has the right to remove “Intent” from drug crimes.

2. How the “Affirmative Defense” Works in Practice Since the State doesn’t have to prove you knew the substance was illegal, the trial strategy has flipped.

• The Old Way: The Prosecutor had to prove you were a criminal.
• The New Way (Post-Adkins): The Prosecutor proves you held the bag. You must then take the stand (or present evidence) to prove you didn’t know what was inside.
• The Risk: This forces many defendants to testify who otherwise wouldn’t, opening them up to cross-examination.

3. The “Blind Mule” Defense We see this often with rental cars and borrowed luggage.

• The Strategy: We use the “Knowledge of Presence” requirement (from Pariente’s concurrence) to argue you didn’t even know the item existed. If you didn’t know the bag was under the seat, you can’t be guilty of possession, regardless of the Adkins ruling.

The Floodgates Are Open

We are left to ponder which statutes will be next on the mens rea chopping block. If the Legislature can remove “intent” from a crime that carries a 25-year prison sentence, what’s next?

Call me at (407) 423-1117. Let’s fight the presumption.

About John Guidry II

John Guidry II is a seasoned criminal defense attorney and founder of the Law Firm of John P. Guidry II, P.A., located in downtown Orlando next to the Orange County Courthouse, where he has practiced for over 30 years. With more than three decades of experience defending clients throughout Central Florida since 1993, Guidry has successfully defended thousands of cases in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Brevard, Lake, and Volusia counties. He has built a reputation for his strategic approach to criminal defense, focusing on pretrial motions and case dismissals rather than jury trials.

Guidry earned both his Juris Doctorate and Master of Business Administration from St. Louis University in 1993. He is a member of the Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of Florida state criminal charges, with a particular emphasis on achieving favorable outcomes through thorough pretrial preparation and motion practice.

Beyond the courtroom, Guidry is a prolific legal educator who has authored over 400 articles on criminal defense topics. He shares his legal expertise through his popular YouTube channel, Instagram, and TikTok accounts, where he has built a substantial following of people eager to learn about the law. His educational content breaks down complex legal concepts into accessible information for the general public.

When not practicing law, Guidry enjoys tennis and pickleball, and loves to travel. Drawing from his background as a former recording studio owner and music video producer in the Orlando area, he brings a creative perspective to his legal practice and continues to apply his passion for video production to his educational content.