Danny Pasicolan v. State of Florida ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •            FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    STATE OF FLORIDA
    _____________________________
    No. 1D14-2634
    _____________________________
    DANNY PASICOLAN,
    Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF FLORIDA,
    Appellee.
    _____________________________
    On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County.
    John H. Skinner, Judge.
    May 2, 2019
    ON REMAND FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
    PER CURIAM.
    Following a jury trial, the appellant, Danny Pasicolan, was
    convicted of one count of traveling to meet a minor to do unlawful
    acts after using a computer online service, contrary to section
    847.0135(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2013) (Count I); one count of
    unlawful use of a two-way communications device, contrary to
    section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2013) (Count II); one count of
    transmission of material harmful to minors, contrary to section
    847.0138(2), Florida Statutes (2013) (Count III); and one count of
    unlawful use of computer services to solicit a child to engage in
    sexual conduct, contrary to section 847.0135(3)(a), Florida
    Statutes (2013) (Count IV). The information alleged that each of
    these offenses occurred on October 10, 2013. After trial, the
    appellant timely appealed his convictions and raised three issues
    on appeal. We affirm the first two issues without further comment.
    In his third issue, the appellant argued that two of his
    convictions violated his constitutional right against double
    jeopardy. Specifically, he argued that use of computer services to
    solicit a minor (Count IV) was subsumed by traveling to meet a
    minor (Count I) and that unlawful use of a two-way
    communications device (Count II) was subsumed by the other
    three counts. We affirmed these convictions under our decision in
    Lee v. State, 
    223 So. 3d 342
     (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). In 2018, the
    Supreme Court quashed our opinion in Lee and held that a
    reviewing court should only consider the charging document to
    determine whether multiple convictions for solicitation, unlawful
    use of a two-way communications device, and traveling were based
    upon the same conduct for purposes of double jeopardy. Lee v.
    State, 
    258 So. 3d 1297
     (Fla. 2018) (Lee II). Applying Lee II to this
    case, the appellant’s convictions in Counts II and IV are VACATED.
    The appellant’s convictions in Counts I and III are AFFIRMED.
    ROBERTS, RAY, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.
    _____________________________
    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 Courtenay H. Miller,
    Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
    Ashley Moody, Attorney General; Lauren Gonzalez and Michael L.
    Schaub, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-2634

Filed Date: 5/2/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021