11.14(g) FAILURE BY A SEXUAL OFFENDER TO COMPLY WITH REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS
(Failure to Report Twice a Year/Failure to Report Quarterly/Providing False Information) 
§ 943.0435(14)(a)–(b), Fla. Stat.
Give this statement if the charge is failure to report twice a year during the sexual offender’s birthday month and six months later pursuant to § 943.0435(14)(a), Fla. Stat., or, for certain specified violators, failure to report during the sexual offender’s birthday month and every third month thereafter pursuant to § 943.0435(14)(b), Fla. Stat.
To prove the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
Give 1a or 1b as applicable if § 943.0435(14)(a), Fla. Stat., is charged.
1.	(Defendant)
a.	is a sexual offender.
b.	has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual offender; therefore, you should consider the sexual offender status element as proven by agreement of the parties.
Give 1c or 1d as applicable if § 943.0435(14)(b), Fla. Stat., is charged.
c.	is a sexual offender and is required to report and reregister as a result of a conviction for (insert relevant factor in § 943.0435(14)(b)1.–(14)(b)11., Fla. Stat.).
d.	has agreed or stipulated that [he] [she] has been convicted as a sexual offender and that [he] [she] is required by law to report in person during [his] [her] birthday month and reregister every third month following [his] [her] (year) birthday month to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
If the defendant offers to stipulate, the court must accept the offer after conducting an on-the-record colloquy with the defendant. See Brown v. State, 719 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 1998); Johnson v. State, 842 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).  If there is a stipulation, the court should not give the definition of “sexual offender” or “convicted.”
2.	(Defendant) [established] [maintained] a permanent, temporary, or transient residence in (name of county) County, Florida.
Give 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3f, or 3g as applicable.
3.	(Defendant)
a.	knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during [his] [her] birthday month in (year) to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
b.	knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during the sixth month following [his] [her] (year) birthday month to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
c.	knowingly failed to reregister by reporting in person during every third month following [his] [her] (year) birthday month to an office of the sheriff in the county in which [he] [she] resides or is otherwise located.
d.	knowingly failed to respond to the address verification correspondence from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement within three weeks from the date of the correspondence.
e.	reported to an office of the sheriff of (name of county) to reregister,
and
Give i or ii as applicable.
i.	knowingly failed to provide that office with (name the single unprovided registration item charged, as worded in the statute).
ii.	knowingly failed to provide that office with any one or more of the following items: (name the unprovided registration items charged, as worded in the statute).
f.	knowingly failed to report all [electronic mail addresses] [and] [or] [all internet identifiers].
g.	knowingly provided false registration information by act or omission.
Read only if the defendant is charged with failing to provide a physical residential address.
The defendant shall provide a physical residential address. A post office box shall not be provided in lieu of a physical residential address.
Give if the defendant meets his or her burden of production. See Barnes v. State, 108 So. 3d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
It is a defense to the crime of Failure by a Sexual Offender to Comply with Registration Requirements that (defendant) attempted to comply with the requirements but was misinformed or otherwise prevented from complying by the office of the sheriff.
There is no statute for the defense of being misinformed or otherwise prevented from registering, and the case law is silent as to (1) which party bears the burden of persuasion of the affirmative defense and (2) the standard for the burden of persuasion. Under the common law, defendants had both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion on an affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
The Florida Supreme Court has often decided, however, that once a defendant meets the burden of production on an affirmative defense, the burden of persuasion is on the State to disprove the affirmative defense beyond a reasonable doubt (e.g., self-defense and consent to enter in a burglary prosecution). In the absence of case law, trial judges must resolve the issue via a special instruction.  See the opinion in Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 (2006), for further guidance.
If burden of persuasion is on the defendant:
If you find that (defendant) proved (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] misinformed [him] [her] or otherwise prevented [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty. If the defendant did not prove (insert appropriate burden of persuasion) that the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] misinformed [him] [her] or otherwise prevented [him] [her] from complying, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Or, if the burden of disproving the affirmative defense is on the State under the beyond a reasonable standard:
If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] did not misinform (defendant) or did not otherwise prevent [him] [her] from complying with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] guilty, if all of the elements of the charge have also been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt on the issue of whether the [office of the sheriff] [Florida Department of Law Enforcement] misinformed (defendant) or otherwise prevented [him] [her] from complying, with the registration requirements, you should find [him] [her] not guilty.
Definitions.  See instruction 11.14(h) for the applicable definitions.

Lesser Included Offenses
No lesser included offenses have been identified for this offense.
Comments
This instruction covers some of the ways a defendant can violate § 943.0435(14), Fla. Stat. There are other possibilities within the statute that will require a special instruction.
This instruction was adopted in 2008 [983 So. 2d 531] and amended in 2012 [85 So. 3d 1090], 2013 [113 So. 3d 754], 2014 [140 So. 3d 1204], 2016 [195 So. 3d 1088], and 2018.