No. Since June 16, 2026, Florida law says you may not use or threaten force to resist an arrest or detention by someone you know or should reasonably know is a law enforcement officer, as long as the officer is acting in good faith. That is true even if a court later finds the arrest was unlawful. The Officer Jason Raynor Act rewrote section 776.051 of the Florida Statutes to remove the old exception for arrests the officer knew were illegal.
What the Officer Jason Raynor Act changed
Senate Bill 156, signed June 16, 2026 as Chapter 2026-144, took effect the day it was signed. The core change is one sentence. The old version of section 776.051 said an officer was not justified in using force to make an arrest that was unlawful and that the officer knew was unlawful. That sentence is gone.
In its place, the statute now prohibits using or threatening force to resist any arrest, any detention, or any officer performing official duties, provided the officer is acting in good faith and is known or reasonably appears to be an officer. Good faith is defined in the law as a sincere and reasonable effort to comply with legal requirements, even if the arrest or detention is later found to be unlawful.
The bill passed the Senate 31 to 4 and the House 103 to 8. It is named for Daytona Beach Officer Jason Raynor, who was shot in 2021 by a man who resisted being detained. The shooter was convicted of manslaughter rather than murder, and the law also adds manslaughter of an on-duty officer to the list of crimes that carry mandatory life without release.
What does “good faith” mean for the officer?
This is the hinge of the whole statute. The question is no longer whether the stop or arrest was legal. The question is whether the officer sincerely and reasonably believed they were following the law.
An officer who stops the wrong car because it matched a description, detains someone on a tip that turns out to be false, or arrests on a warrant that was later quashed is almost certainly acting in good faith under this definition. The arrest might be thrown out. The resisting charge survives.
The only arrests outside the statute’s protection are those where the officer was not making a sincere, reasonable effort to follow the law, for example an officer who knows there is no basis for the stop and makes it anyway. Proving that is a high bar, and it is the defense’s burden to raise it.
What else is in the law
The act also amends two charges that come up constantly in South Florida arrests. Assault on an officer under section 784.07 and resisting with violence under section 843.01 now both require that the officer was engaged in official duties at the time. Battery on an officer as a third-degree felony is ranked at level 5 of the sentencing scoresheet, which raises the points it adds in a felony case.
A companion bill, SB 436, was signed the same day and took effect July 1, 2026. It does two things. A prior conviction for resisting with violence now turns a later misdemeanor battery into a third-degree felony. And battery on an officer that causes injury is added to the prison releasee reoffender list, which carries mandatory sentences for people released from prison within the past three years.
What this means if you are charged in Miami-Dade
Resisting without violence under section 843.02 and resisting with violence under section 843.01 are among the most common add-on charges in Miami-Dade arrests. They get attached to traffic stops, bar fights, domestic calls and street encounters. For years, one of the standard defenses to those charges was that the underlying stop or arrest was illegal, so the person had the right to resist it.
That defense is now limited to cases where the officer was not acting in good faith. For most arrests, that means the fight shifts away from justifying the resistance and toward the stop itself: whether the officer had reasonable suspicion, whether the detention was prolonged without cause, and whether evidence found afterward should be suppressed. Winning a suppression motion can gut the main charge. It no longer excuses the resisting charge on its own.
Exactly how the new section 776.051 interacts with resisting without violence, which has its own element that the officer was executing a lawful duty, is a question lawyers are still testing in Miami-Dade courtrooms. It should be assessed case by case rather than assumed.
Two practical points. First, pulling an arm away, stiffening up or refusing to turn around during an arrest can be charged as resisting without violence, and after June 16 the legality of the stop is a much weaker answer to that charge. The safer course during any stop is to comply physically, say clearly that you do not consent and that you want a lawyer, and save the argument for court. Second, anyone with a prior resisting-with-violence conviction now carries felony exposure on any new battery arrest, however minor, because of SB 436. That history should be the first thing disclosed to a lawyer.
The law is five months old. There are no Miami-Dade numbers yet on how often the good-faith question is being litigated, but the statute was written to make that question rare.
At a glance
- Effective June 16, 2026 (SB 156, Chapter 2026-144)
- Using or threatening force to resist an arrest or detention is barred when the officer acts in good faith, even if the arrest is later found unlawful
- Good faith means a sincere and reasonable effort to follow the law
- Assault on an officer and resisting with violence now require the officer to be on official duties
- SB 436 (effective July 1, 2026): a prior resisting-with-violence conviction turns a new misdemeanor battery into a third-degree felony
- Next step if charged: the legality of the stop still matters for suppressing evidence, so preserve video, witnesses and the officer’s stated reason for the stop
This article is general information about Florida law and Miami-Dade procedure as of its publication date. It is not legal advice. Laws change, and the facts of a case matter.
