NATHAN DYGART
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
On remand from the Florida Supreme Court, the First District Court of Appeal reconsiders Dygart's double-jeopardy challenge to convictions for solicitation of a minor and traveling after solicitation of a minor. In light of the intervening Lee v. State decision, the court reverses the lesser conviction (traveling) while affirming the solicitation conviction.
The court reversed the conviction for traveling after solicitation of a minor while affirming the solicitation conviction. Under Lee v. State, when a reviewing court cannot determine from the charging document alone whether multiple counts are based on the same conduct, the lesser conviction must be reversed.
[1] In analyzing whether multiple convictions based on solicitation of a minor and traveling after solicitation violate double jeopardy, courts must look solely to the chargi…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“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 Florida Supreme Court's holding in Lee v. State establishing the standard for analyzing double-jeopardy claims in this context.
Dygart was convicted of two counts: solicitation of a minor and traveling after solicitation of a minor. The court must determine whether these convic…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Solicitation Of A Minor cases and more on FLexlaw
___________________________ 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 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.
_____________________________ Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Kathleen Stover, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Giselle D. Lylen, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sherman v. State, 272 So. 3d 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
- LEE v. State, 258 So. 3d 1297 (Fla. 2018)
- Dygart v. State, 247 So. 3d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)