SB 1194 creates a new Florida criminal statute addressing mail theft. The bill defines key terms such as “mail,” “mail depository,” and “postal service,” and then prohibits a range of conduct involving unlawfully obtained mail. These prohibited acts include taking mail from a mailbox or mail carrier with intent to steal, obtaining mail by fraud or deception, and later selling, receiving, possessing, transferring, buying, or concealing mail known to have been stolen or otherwise illegally obtained.
The bill also targets theft and misuse of postal keys and locks. It makes it unlawful to steal or obtain by false pretense any key or lock used by a postal service for mail delivery or deposit, and it separately prohibits knowingly making, forging, counterfeiting, possessing, or disposing of such keys or locks with unlawful intent. A violation of the new section is a third-degree felony, punishable under Florida’s general felony sentencing statutes, and the act would have taken effect October 1, 2025.
If enacted, SB 1194 would have added section 812.136 to the Florida Statutes, creating a standalone mail theft offense and expanding the state’s criminal code to cover both direct theft of mail and downstream handling of stolen mail. It would also have extended criminal liability to conduct involving postal keys and locks, including forgery, possession, and unauthorized transfer, thereby giving law enforcement and prosecutors a specific state-law tool to address mail-related theft and fraud. The bill would have affected individuals who steal mail, people who traffic in stolen mail, and those who unlawfully obtain or misuse postal access devices.
The available context suggests general support for the policy goal of combating mail theft, but the bill itself did not advance to enactment because it died in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee. The note that a companion measure passed as part of CS/CS/CS/SB 700 indicates the underlying issue was accepted in some form elsewhere in the legislative process, even though this standalone bill did not move forward. No committee transcript or recorded votes are available here to show detailed debate, amendment activity, or opposition arguments.
The main point of contention appears to have been legislative vehicle and duplication rather than the substance of mail-theft prohibition itself. SB 1194 died in committee while a companion bill passed in another measure, suggesting lawmakers may have preferred to address the issue through a broader criminal justice package instead of a separate standalone bill. Because no transcripts or votes are provided, there is no record here of specific objections, but the procedural outcome indicates the bill’s policy was likely absorbed into the companion legislation rather than enacted independently.