Money laundering in Florida is prosecuted under section 896.101, the Florida Money Laundering Act. At its core, it punishes conducting a financial transaction with the proceeds of crime, knowing they are proceeds, in order to conceal their nature or source or to dodge a reporting requirement. The proceeds have to come from specified unlawful activity, which the statute defines as racketeering activity, a broad list of underlying felonies.
The charge rarely travels alone. It is layered on top of a fraud, theft, drug, or racketeering allegation as the way the money was moved, which is exactly what raises the total exposure and puts assets in the crosshairs for forfeiture. Understanding it as the second half of another allegation is the key to defending it.
How the Degree Is Set
Money laundering is graded by the total value of the financial transactions in any twelve-month period, on the same three-tier structure that runs through the fraud statutes. On top of the prison exposure, the statute allows a fine up to $250,000 or twice the value of the transactions, whichever is greater.
| Transactions in any 12-month period | Degree | Maximum |
|---|---|---|
| More than $300 but under $20,000 | Third-degree felony | Up to 5 years |
| $20,000 to under $100,000 | Second-degree felony | Up to 15 years |
| $100,000 or more | First-degree felony | Up to 30 years |
The fine can reach $250,000 or twice the transaction value, whichever is greater. The proceeds must come from specified unlawful activity, defined as racketeering activity, and entrapment is an available defense.
Earlier in my career, my practice was almost entirely white-collar defense, including fraud cases, conspiracy charges, and a statewide racketeering prosecution. That work shaped how I read these files: where the money really moved, what the State can prove about intent, and where a paper case quietly falls apart. I defend the state-level side of these matters here in Florida. When a case is federal, or turns federal, I bring in or refer trusted federal co-counsel so you are covered on both tracks rather than caught between them. Learn more about my background.
Knowledge, Reporting, and Inducement
The knowledge element is more forgiving to the State than it first appears and more contestable than it sounds. The State does not have to prove the defendant knew which crime produced the money, only that he knew it was the proceeds of some form of felony. For transactions over $10,000, a should-have-known standard can apply unless the person had a duty to file a currency report and met it, so the reporting picture has to be examined closely.
Inducement is the other recurring issue. Money laundering cases are often constructed through stings, undercover operations, and confidential informants, and the statute expressly preserves the defense of entrapment. Where the government supplied the opportunity, the funds, or the pressure, whether the conduct was induced becomes a central question rather than a footnote.
How the Money Is Said to Move
The State’s theory in a laundering case is usually one of a few patterns: breaking deposits into smaller amounts to stay under reporting thresholds, routing funds through businesses or shell entities to disguise their source, or moving money to promote more of the underlying activity. The statute now expressly includes virtual currency among the monetary instruments it reaches, so digital transfers are squarely within it.
The reporting rules run through all of it. For transactions over $10,000, the analysis turns on whether a currency report was required and filed, and the statute gives immunity to financial institutions that comply with a warrant or subpoena, which shapes where the records come from. Because the charge depends entirely on the funds being proceeds of a felony, the strength of the underlying allegation controls the laundering count, and a weak predicate is a weak laundering case. Mapping how the State says the money moved, and testing each link, is where the defense takes hold.
How a Money Laundering Case Is Defended
The first move is to separate the laundering count from the underlying allegation. If the predicate crime is weak, the proceeds theory weakens with it, because there have to be proceeds of unlawful activity in the first place. Attacking the knowledge element, the claim that the defendant knew the funds were criminal proceeds, often goes to the heart of the case.
The transaction total is the next lever, since the degree and the fine track the twelve-month figure, and how the State aggregated transactions can be challenged. Entrapment, the reporting analysis for larger transactions, and the lawfulness of the searches and subpoenas that produced the financial records all open further fronts. Because forfeiture runs alongside, protecting assets is part of the defense from the beginning.
Common Questions
What is money laundering under Florida law?
Under section 896.101, the Florida Money Laundering Act, it is conducting a financial transaction with proceeds of unlawful activity, knowing they are proceeds, in order to conceal their source or to avoid a reporting requirement. The underlying crime must be racketeering activity, which is defined broadly.
How are the penalties set?
By the value of the transactions in any twelve-month period. More than $300 to under $20,000 is a third-degree felony, $20,000 to under $100,000 is a second-degree felony, and $100,000 or more is a first-degree felony, with fines up to $250,000 or twice the transaction value.
Do I have to know exactly where the money came from?
No. The State has to prove you knew the funds were proceeds of some form of felony, not the specific crime. For transactions over $10,000, a should-have-known standard can apply unless reporting requirements were met, which is a point worth scrutinizing.
Is entrapment a defense?
It can be. The statute expressly preserves the defense of entrapment, which matters because these cases are often built through stings and confidential informants. Whether the conduct was induced by the government is sometimes the whole case.
Does money laundering travel with other charges?
Usually. It is layered on top of fraud, theft, drug, or racketeering allegations, which raises the total exposure and the forfeiture risk. Pulling the laundering count apart from the underlying allegation is often where the defense starts.
Related: White collar and fraud overview, Racketeering and RICO, Pre-file defense and asset forfeiture, Scheme to defraud and organized fraud, and About Rory Safir.
This page is general information about Florida law, not legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. These offenses are governed by chapters 817, 831, 895, and 896, and section 775.0844, Florida Statutes, and many of the same facts can also draw federal charges, so the exposure should be confirmed against current state and federal law. Every case turns on its own facts, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
