HB 1447 expands Florida criminal trespass law and creates a new offense related to interference at certain large ticketed events. First, it amends s. 810.09, F.S., to make trespassing on property maintained or secured by federal, state, or local law enforcement a third-degree felony when the area is properly posted with a warning that it is a designated restricted site secured by law enforcement. Under current law, trespass on property other than a structure or conveyance is generally a first-degree misdemeanor; this bill increases the penalty in the specified law-enforcement-secured locations.
Second, the bill amends s. 871.05, F.S., to prohibit a person from intentionally touching or striking a covered participant at a covered event, entering or remaining in a restricted area without authorization, or entering or remaining in a venue during a ticketed covered event with more than 5,000 attendees without authorization. The bill defines covered events broadly to include athletic competitions, practices, and live artistic or theatrical performances, and it applies to participants such as players, coaches, officials, performers, and event security or operations staff. It also bars soliciting others to commit these violations and allows any profit or benefit from the offense to be seized and forfeited under Florida’s Contraband Forfeiture Act.
The bill changes Florida’s criminal code by elevating certain trespass conduct from misdemeanor to felony status and by creating new misdemeanor and felony penalties for unauthorized intrusion into restricted areas or large ticketed event venues. It affects property secured by law enforcement, as well as sports, entertainment, and other public-facing events with more than 5,000 attendees, and it gives prosecutors additional tools to charge and penalize unauthorized entry, interference, and related solicitation. It also authorizes forfeiture of profits or benefits connected to a conviction under the new event-interference provisions.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote history, so there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s enactment and its focus on security at law-enforcement-secured sites and large events, the measure appears to have been treated as a public-safety and event-security bill rather than a controversial policy change in the available record.
The main policy tension in the bill is between strengthening security and protecting access or expressive conduct at public venues. The most significant points of contention would likely involve the expansion of felony liability for trespass on law-enforcement-secured property, the broad reach of the new venue-entry offense at ticketed events over 5,000 people, and the potential for criminal penalties to apply to conduct near sports or entertainment events. The bill’s supporters would likely emphasize deterrence, safety, and protection of participants and secured sites, while critics might question the breadth of the venue restrictions and the severity of felony penalties for unauthorized entry.