Most criminal enforcement statutes regarding water pollution are contained in Title 33, United States Code. A few statutes are in Titles 18 and 42. Set out below in the left column are:
In the right column are cases from the book, along with citations and links to cases from the 11th Circuit and Florida courts citing either the case from the book or the statute relied on in that case.
Boustrophedonic
Etymology: < Greek βουστροϕηδόν, adverb < βουστρόϕος ox-turning.
(Written) alternately from right to left and from left to right, like the course of the plough in successive furrows; as in various ancient inscriptions in Greek and other languages.
Source: Oxford English Dictionary
Fla. Standard Jury Instruction 3.3(h) Willful Blindness
Do not give if there is no evidence supporting an inference of deliberate ignorance or if the evidence is consistent only with a theory of actual knowledge.
In some cases, the issue to be determined is whether the defendant had knowledge of a certain fact. Florida law recognizes a concept known as willful blindness, which is sometimes referred to as “deliberate avoidance of positive knowledge.” Willful blindness occurs when a person has his or her suspicion aroused about a particular fact, realized its probability, but deliberately refrained from obtaining confirmation because he or she wanted to remain in ignorance. A person who engages in willful blindness is deemed to have knowledge of that fact.
Comments
See Desilien v. State, 595 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Hallman v. State, 633 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Hale v. State, 838 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).
This instruction was adopted in 2013.
Accord, U.S. v. M.C.C. of Florida, Inc., 772 F.2d 1501 (11th Cir. 1985), readopted in relevant part on remand, 848 F.2d 1133 (11th Cir. 1988) ("Given the broad objectives of the Clean Water Act, we are in agreement with the Fifth Circuit that the “word ‘addition’ as used in the definition of the term ‘discharge,’ may reasonably be understood to include ‘redeposit.’ ”); and Parker v. Scrap Metal Processors, Inc., 386 F.3d 993 (11th Cir. 2004) ("Storm-water runoff does not, in all circumstances, originate from a point source, but several courts have concluded that it does when storm water collects in piles of industrial debris and eventually enters navigable waters. Avoyelles Sportsmen's League v. Marsh, 715 F.2d 897, 922 (5th Cir. 1983) ("[W]e agree with the district court that the bulldozers and backhoes were ‘point sources,’ since they collected into windrows and piles material that may ultimately have found its way back into the waters."). The piles of debris in this case collected water, which then flowed into the stream...They are, therefore, point sources within the meaning of the CWA. Moreover, the plaintiffs produced photographs of backhoes and other earth-moving equipment, which are also point sources.")
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. |