Amendments to 794.05

1. B.B. v. State

   659 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1995)   Cited 25 times

   We agree with the opinion of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Victor v. State, 566 So.2d 354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), that the purpose of section 794.05(1), Florida Statutes, is "to protect minors from sex acts imposed by adults." Victor, 566 at 356. Here, though, section 794.05 is not being applied in furtherance of the purpose delineated by the district court in Victor. Section 794.05 is not being utilized as a shield to protect a minor, but rather, it is being used as a weapon to adjudicate a minor delinquent. Thus, we do not hold that section 794.05 is facially unconstitutional but only that it is unconstitutional as applied to this 16-year-old as a basis for a delinquency proceeding.

   PAGE 260
2. State v. Walborn

   729 So. 2d 504 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 8 times

   • Motion to dismiss

   On direct appeal, the State alleges that the trial court erred in finding that section 794.05, Florida Statutes (1997), violated Walborn's right to equal protection. Section 794.05(1), Florida Statutes (1997), states:

   PAGE 505
3. Thompson v. State

   483 So. 2d 1 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 12 times

   Defendant was convicted of carnal intercourse with an unmarried female under the age of eighteen years in violation of section 794.05, Florida Statutes (1983). The evidence at trial revealed that when the victim, defendant's stepdaughter, was about eight years old, the defendant began fondling her. This behavior culminated in sexual intercourse when the victim was approximately eleven years old. As a result of the sexual relations with her stepfather, the victim became pregnant at the age of fourteen, eventually giving birth to a son.
4. Privett v. State

   110 So. 3d 543 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 3 times

   We affirm William Bryan Privett's conviction for lewd or lascivious battery on a person under 16 years of age and the ten-year sentence (followed by five years' probation) he received as a result. We also affirm his convictions on counts three and four and the sentences he received on those counts. But we reverse his conviction on count two for soliciting unlawful sexual activity with minors, in violation of sections 794.05 and 777.04(2), Florida Statutes (2008). See Stumpf v. State, 677 So.2d 1298, 1298 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (“Threatening to make another person the victim of a crime obviously does not constitute the conduct proscribed by section 777.04(2), Florida Statutes[.]”). See also Randall v. State, 919 So.2d 695, 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Patel v. State, 679 So.2d 850, 852 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (reversing because the charged offense would require proof that the defendant had been “soliciting [the minor] to commit sexual battery on another child younger than age 16”).

   PAGE 544
5. Terry v. State

   224 So. 3d 763 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 1 times

   Appellant appeals his convictions for thirteen counts of violating section 794.05(1), Florida Statutes (2014), which makes it unlawful for a person twenty-four years of age or older to engage in sexual activity with a person sixteen or seventeen years of age. Appellant claims a birth certificate with his same name was insufficient to prove he was twenty-four years of age or older because the state did not link the birth certificate to him and further claims the birth certificate by itself was insufficient evidence to prove his age. Appellant also claims that the late disclosure of the birth certificate procedurally prejudiced his defense.
6. Jones v. State

   127 So. 3d 622 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 3 times

   The defendant, Larry Douglas Jones, initiated online contact with the sixteen-year old victim through MySpace. After exchanging messages through MySpace, the defendant and the victim eventually met in person. The defendant took the victim back to his apartment, where they engaged in sexual intercourse. They continued to communicate online and engaged in sexual relations on two other occasions. When the victim's mother found out about their relationship, she contacted the police. The police investigated and arrested the defendant after determining from his driver's license that he was thirty-seven years old. The defendant was charged with three counts of unlawful sexual activity with a minor by a person 24 years of age or older, in violation of section 794.05(1), Florida Statutes (2008).

   PAGE 623
7. Victor v. State

   566 So. 2d 354 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 6 times

   Florida Statutes Section 794.05(1) provides:
8. Pulcini v. State

   41 So. 3d 338 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 9 times

   "Self-serving statements are not admissible under section 90.803(18)," see Lott v. State, 695 So.2d 1239, 1243 (Fla. 1997), and section 794.05(3) states that "[t]he victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section."

   PAGE 348
9. United States v. Chavez-Hernandez

   671 F.3d 494 (5th Cir. 2012)   Cited 107 times

   The first problem with this approach is that it “goes behind” a statute of conviction that, on its face, is arguably not a crime of violence. As the majority opinion details, Chavez–Hernandez's prior conviction implicates our Taylor–Shepard case law, mandating an inquiry under these circumstances into whether the Florida statute of conviction “criminalizes some conduct that would not be criminalized under the generic, contemporary meaning of statutory rape” and “sexual abuse of a minor.” United States v. Lopez–DeLeon, 513 F.3d 472, 475 (5th Cir.2008) (statutory rape); see also United States v. Munoz–Ortenza, 563 F.3d 112, 115 (5th Cir.2009) (sexual abuse of a minor) . The actual crime to which Chavez–Hernandez pled guilty is “Unlawful Sexual Activity with Certain Minors,” Fla. Stat. § 794.05, the modern incarnation of Florida's longstanding statutory rape law. See, e.g., Holton v. State, 28 Fla. 303, 9 So. 716, 717 (1891). Relevant to our case, the Florida statute criminalizes sexual intercourse between a “person 24 years of age or older” and “a person 16 or 17 years of age.” Fla. Stat. § 794.05(1).

   PAGE 503
10. Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions

    137 S. Ct. 1562 (2017)   Cited 163 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Arizona Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-1405(A) (1989) California Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 261.5(a) (West Supp. 1998) Florida Fla. Stat. § 794.05(1) (1991) Idaho Idaho Code Ann. § 18-6101(1) (Supp. 1996) Mississippi Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-67 (Supp. 1993) North Dakota N. D. Cent. Code Ann. § 12.1-20-05 (Supp. 1983); § 14-10-01 (1997) Oregon Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 163.315(1), 163.435(1), 163.445(1) (1997) Tennessee Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-506(a) (Supp. 1996) Virginia Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-371 (1996) Wisconsin Wis. Stat. §§ 948.01(1), 948.09 (1993-1994)

    PAGE 1576