Major FL Court: Defendant Driving 94 in a 40 Was NOT Recklessly Driving

March 5, 2026 Don Pumphrey, Jr. Criminal Defense Social Share

Case Summary

Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that the defendant – who was adjudicated guilty of reckless driving after he drove 94 miles per hour when the speed limit was 40 – was not guilty of reckless driving as a matter of law. Here’s why.

• CASE: Harris v. State, 318 So.3d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)
• Charge(s): Reckless Driving (Violation of Probation)
• Outcome: VOP finding reversed, as the defendant was not driving recklessly simply because he was speeding.

Reckless Driving Charges in Florida

In Florida, reckless driving (Fla. Stat. 316.192) is a very serious criminal offense.

For someone to be convicted, the State must prove both of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

• The defendant operated a vehicle 
• The defendant’s operation of the vehicle showed “willful and wanton disregard for the safety or persons or property”

Important: “Willful” means intentionally, knowingly, and purposely. “Wanton” means with a conscious and intentional indifference to consequences and with knowledge that damage is likely to be done to persons or property. W.E.B. v. State, 553 So.2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)

If someone is found to have recklessly driven, the following penalty scheme applies under state law:

• For a first offense that does not involve injury to persons or property, up to 90 days in jail and a fine between $25 and $500
• For a second or subsequent conviction that does not involve injury to persons or property, up to 6 months in jail and a fine between $50 and $1,000
• If someone causes property damage or non-serious bodily injury due to reckless driving, it is a first-degree misdemeanor (up to 1 year in jail and a $1,000 fine)
• If someone causes serious bodily harm (“an injury to another person, which consists of a physical condition that creates a substantial risk of death, serious personal disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ”), it is a third-degree felony (up to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine)

If someone’s reckless driving causes the death of one or more victims, it is considered vehicular homicide (Fla. Stat. 782.071) in Florida.

For a defendant to be guilty of vehicular homicide, the State must prove all of the following beyond a reasonable doubt

• The defendant operated a vehicle
• The defendant’s operation of the vehicle caused the death(s) of one or more other people
• The defendant’s operation of the vehicle (which caused the death) was reckless

Vehicular homicide is typically considered a second-degree felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

However, it is a first-degree felony (up to 30 years in prison and a $10,000 fine) if either of the following are true:  

• The defendant has a prior conviction for DUI manslaughter, BUI manslaughter, vehicular homicide or vessel homicide (Trenton’s Law, 2025)
• The defendant failed to give information to authorities, render aid to the victim(s), or left the scene of the accident (e.g. fails to stop)

It is an “oft-cited” maxim in Florida law that “speeding alone” cannot support a conviction for vehicular homicide as a matter of law. Luzardo v. State, 147 So.3d 1083 (Fla. 3d. DCA 2014). If a defendant “did everything right” with the exception of exceeding the speed limit, Florida courts have consistently held they are not guilty of vehicular homicide (or vessel homicide).

Though speeding alone cannot establish that the defendant was reckless in a vehicular homicide case, their speed can be considered alongside other factors used to evaluate recklessness. These include (Hamilton v. State, 439 So.2d 238 (Fla. 2d. DCA 1983)):

• Whether visibility was good or poor at the time of the accident
• Whether the defendant was staying “in their lane” or swerving out of it
• Whether there was signage indicating drivers should pay particular attention or slow down (e.g. school zones)
• Whether the cause of the death (e.g. the hazard that caused it) was foreseeable/perceived by others 
• Whether the defendant exercised “any degree of care” to avoid collision
• Whether the defendant was traveling in an area with heavy foot traffic (e.g. residential)
• Whether the defendant was familiar with the area in which they were traveling

But does this same principle apply when someone is charged with reckless driving? The answer is yes – someone is not guilty of reckless driving in Florida simply because they sped (even if they exceeded the speed limit by a great deal).

Let’s take a look at a recent case that reaffirmed this principle – Harris v. State, 318 So.3d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) – and discuss what this means for reckless driving law in Florida.

Note: Though exceeding the speed limit is not inherently reckless driving, driving at extremely high speeds may violate Florida’s new grossly excessive speeding law (2025). For more, click here.

KEY CASE: Harris v. State, 318 So.3d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)

In Harris, the defendant (Harris) was accused of violating the conditions of his probation. Harris was traveling approximately 94 miles per hour in an area where the speed limit was 40. After he was pulled over and arrested, a violation of probation hearing was held – and Harris’s probation was revoked because he “recklessly drove” (e.g. committed a new crime).

The trial judge based his conclusion that Harris was driving recklessly (in violation of Fla. Stat. 316.192) solely on the fact that Harris was driving 94 miles per hour, 54 miles per hour over the speed limit. But in its opinion, the 2nd DCA noted the following:

“The weather was clear and the road was straight. Harris was neither swerving nor weaving out of his lane. The only people visible on the video were two landscaping workers in the median. Harris was not traveling in the lane next to the median. Another vehicle was traveling on the same side of the street as Harris, but it was in the other lane just moments before Harris’s vehicle came into view. 

“The video also shows that one car pulled into a driveway on the other side of the street. The officer testified that before he saw Harris’s vehicle, he observed two people walking southbound on the sidewalk. A grass strip separates the road from the sidewalk. Harris was traveling in the lane next to the sidewalk, and the video shows no one was on the sidewalk at that time. Before the officer saw Harris’s vehicle, he saw people in the area getting out of their vehicles and going into their homes. The video shows cars parked in driveways, not on the street.”

On appeal, Harris argued that even if he was traveling at precisely the speed the State alleged, he was not recklessly driving as a matter of law (so he did not “willfully and substantially” violate his probation). Harris contended that excessive speed alone was insufficient as a matter of law to make him guilty of reckless driving.

Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeal (Greater Tampa area) agreed and reversed the trial judge’s finding that Harris violated his probation by “recklessly” driving. Concluding his conduct behind the wheel was “careless” (e.g. negligent) rather than reckless, the 2nd DCA wrote:

“Here, Harris was traveling at an excessive speed of ninety-four mph in a forty mph zone because he was late for work. He was traveling on a four-lane road with a median in a mostly residential area. He was driving during the day without evidence of swerving within his lane, without evidence of weaving outside his lane, and without evidence of actually endangering traffic or pedestrians. Two landscaping workers who were in the median were not next to Harris’s lane of travel. And significantly, the video showed no pedestrians or bicyclists on either sidewalk or on the road. Once the officer pulled out to stop Harris, Harris slowed considerably as he approached the intersection. The video shows that Harris stopped safely at the intersection and then turned onto a side street where he pulled over safely.”

“Although Harris’s excessive speed is clearly concerning and constitutes a civil infraction that is a moving violation, his excessive speed alone was insufficient to prove recklessness. … The State failed to present competent, substantial evidence that circumstances in addition to Harris’s speeding showed that he was acting “with a conscious and intentional indifference to consequences and with knowledge that damage is likely to be done to persons or property.” Therefore, we reverse the orders revoking Harris’s probation and the resulting sentences and remand for probation to be reinstated in both circuit court cases.”

Put simply, because no aggravating circumstances made Harris’s speeding especially dangerous, he did not drive in a manner that was likely to cause “damage” to persons or property. Because of this, he was not guilty of reckless driving as a matter of law.

In sum, Harris v. State, 318 So.3d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) marks a significant development in Florida’s corpus of case law on reckless driving in Florida. The 2nd DCA held that:

• Harris driving 94 in a 40 mile per hour zone was a moving violation (civil infraction), not a violation of Florida criminal law
• There were no pedestrians in Harris’s immediate vicinity, Harris did not swerve out of his lane, and he safely pulled over immediately once he was pursued by officers
• Since he was only speeding (e.g. no aggravating circumstances), Harris was not guilty of reckless driving
• As a result, the judge’s order was reversed (as Harris had not willfully and substantially violated his probation by committing a new crime)

Florida’s criminal defense community should take note of Harris v. State, 318 So.3d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), as it makes clear what is and is not considered reckless driving in the state. It is directly relevant in cases that involve charges of reckless driving, as well as vehicular (or vessel) homicide cases – as both offenses require the State to prove reckless operation.

It is critical to find experienced and trusted legal representation as soon as possible if someone is charged with vehicular homicide, DUI manslaughter, BUI manslaughter or vessel homicide. This decision could make the difference in whether or not someone faces a lengthy prison term and hefty fines.

Criminal Defense Attorney in Tallahassee, FL

Don Pumphrey, Jr. is a Former Prosecutor, Former State Police Officer, Lifetime Member of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; for over 25 years as a private defense attorney who is Trusted, Experienced, Aggressive in Criminal Defense as a Trial Attorney, Criminal Lawyer, Criminal Defense Lawyer for the accused in Florida State Courts located in Tallahassee, Florida but handling cases throughout the State of Florida.

Don Pumphrey, Jr. and the Tallahassee criminal defense lawyers at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting criminal charges on behalf of clients and winning. Call Pumphrey Law now at (850) 681-7777 to learn more about what we can do for you. Our lawyers will be happy to provide you with a free consultation.

  Social Share