NATHAN DYGART
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2018-05-18
No. 13-4977
247 So. 3d 655 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2018) Negative Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

When the charging document does not clearly establish whether multiple convictions are based on the same conduct, the lesser conviction must be reversed under the double-jeopardy analysis mandated by Lee v. State.


Headnotes

[1] Dual convictions for solicitation of a minor and traveling to meet a minor violate double jeopardy when the traveling statute incorporates the elements of solicitation.

[2] When determining whether multiple convictions violate double jeopardy for solicitation of a minor, unlawful use of a two-way communications device, and traveling after so…

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“to determine whether multiple convictions of solicitation of a minor, unlawful use of a two-way communications device, and traveling after solicitation of a minor are based upon the same conduct for purposes of double jeopardy, the reviewing court may consider only the charging document.”

The court explained the rule from Lee v. State governing double-jeopardy analysis.

Facts & Procedural History

Nathan Dygart was convicted of solicitation of a minor and traveling after solicitation of a minor. The Florida Supreme Court remanded his case to rec…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

No. 1D13-4977 _____________________________

NATHAN DYGART,

Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

___________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. Jackie L. Fulford.

May 13, 2019

ON REMAND FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT PER CURIAM.

This court earlier affirmed Dygart’s convictions, concluding that there was no double-jeopardy violation. See Dygart v. State, 247 So. 3d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). The Florida Supreme Court has now quashed that decision, remanding for reconsideration based on the intervening decision in Lee v. State, 258 So. 3d 1297 (Fla. 2018). See Dygart v. State, SC18-968 (Fla. Apr. 12, 2019).

In Lee, the Florida Supreme Court held “that to determine whether multiple convictions of solicitation of a minor, unlawful use of a two-way communications device, and traveling after solicitation of a minor are based upon the same conduct for purposes of double jeopardy, the reviewing court may consider only the charging document.” Lee, 258 So. 3d at 1304. Looking only at

2

the information in this case, we cannot conclude one way or the other whether the State based the two charged counts (one for solicitation and one for travel following solicitation) on the same solicitation. In this circumstance, Lee requires that we reverse the lesser conviction.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

WINOKUR and WINSOR, JJ., concur; MAKAR, J., concurs in result only.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dygart v. State, 247 So. 3d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
    …d, arguing insufficient evidence, entrapment, and double jeopardy, among others. This court affirmed with a short opinion that addressed only the doublejeopardy issue. Dygart v. State, 163 So. 3d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), quashed by Dygart v. State, 2016 WL 1700524 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2016). On that issue, the court concluded it was bound by this court’s earlier precedent holding that “dual convictions for violation of sections 847.0135(3) and 847.0135(4), Florida Statutes (2011), do not violate double jeopardy.” I…
    1 / 2
  • Sherman v. State, 247 So. 3d 663 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
  • Dygart v. State, 270 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)

Authorities Cited (15 total)

View all 15 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw