Double jeopardy violation for solicitation offense despite no-contest plea

Rodriguez v. State, 2D14-272 (January 29, 2016)

Second District concluded that judgments for traveling to seduce/solicit a child for a sex act and use of a computer for solicitation constituted double jeopardy.  The solicitation offense is subsumed by the traveling offense.  The error was reviewable on direct appeal despite the defendant’s no-contest plea because: (1) the plea was general rather than the result of a plea bargain, (2) the error was apparent from the record, and (3) there was nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of double jeopardy.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s