Sang Youn Kim v. State , 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 105 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
    MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    OF FLORIDA
    SECOND DISTRICT
    SANG YOUN KIM,                      )
    )
    Appellant,               )
    )
    v.                                  )                  Case No. 2D13-6244
    )
    STATE OF FLORIDA,                   )
    )
    Appellee.                )
    ___________________________________ )
    Opinion filed January 7, 2015.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee
    County; John F. Lakin, Judge.
    Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and
    Richard P. Albertine, Jr., Assistant Public
    Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,
    Tallahassee, and Susan D. Dunlevy,
    Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for
    Appellee.
    KHOUZAM, Judge.
    Sang Youn Kim pleaded no contest to traveling to seduce/solicit/entice a
    child to commit a sex act and use of a computer to seduce/solicit/entice a child to
    commit a sex act, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss on
    double jeopardy grounds. Because these dual convictions violate the prohibition
    against double jeopardy, we affirm in part and vacate in part.
    The record shows that on September 15, 2012, Kim responded to a
    Craigslist ad placed by an undercover officer. The officer advised Kim—who was forty-
    six years old at the time—that he was communicating with a fourteen-year-old girl. The
    next day (September 16), Kim continued communicating with the fictitious girl via email,
    indicating that he wanted to have sex with her. He arranged to meet at a location in
    Manatee County that he believed was the girl's home, traveled from his Tampa home to
    the Manatee County location, and was taken into custody upon his arrival.
    Kim was charged with traveling to seduce/solicit/entice a child to commit a
    sex act under section 847.0135(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2012), and use of a computer to
    seduce/solicit/entice a child to commit a sex act under section 847.0135(3)(a). Both
    offenses were alleged to have occurred on September 16, 2012. He moved to dismiss
    on double jeopardy grounds. The trial court denied the motion, determining that the
    dual charges did not violate double jeopardy principles.
    But in the recent opinion Shelley v. State, this court addressed a nearly
    identical issue, holding as follows:
    In essence, the traveling offense [under section
    847.0135(4)(b)] proscribes traveling to meet a child to
    engage in unlawful sexual contact after having solicited the
    child's parent, legal guardian, or custodian or a person
    believed to be such. Thus, the soliciting offense [under
    section 847.0135(3)(b)] does not contain an element that is
    not found in the traveling offense. See [Hartley v. State, 
    129 So. 3d 486
    , 491 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)]; [Pinder v. State, 
    128 So. 3d 141
    , 143 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)]. As a result, dual
    convictions for soliciting and traveling in the course of one
    criminal transaction or episode violate the prohibition against
    double jeopardy. 
    Id.
    -2-
    
    134 So. 3d 1138
    , 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 
    147 So. 3d 527
     (Fla. 2014). This
    analysis applies equally to the charges in question here, soliciting under section
    847.0135(3)(a) and traveling under section 847.0135(4)(a), which run parallel to the
    statutory sections addressed in Shelley.1 Thus, "the convictions for both soliciting and
    1
    The statutory sections appear in their entirety as follows:
    (3) Certain uses of computer services or devices
    prohibited.--Any person who knowingly uses a computer
    online service, Internet service, local bulletin board service,
    or any other device capable of electronic data storage or
    transmission to:
    (a) Seduce, solicit, lure, or entice, or attempt to seduce,
    solicit, lure, or entice, a child or another person believed by
    the person to be a child, to commit any illegal act described
    in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise
    engage in any unlawful sexual conduct with a child or with
    another person believed by the person to be a child; or
    (b) Solicit, lure, or entice, or attempt to solicit, lure, or entice
    a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child or a person
    believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a
    child to consent to the participation of such child in any act
    described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to
    otherwise engage in any sexual conduct,
    commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided
    in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Any person who, in
    violating this subsection, misrepresents his or her age,
    commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as
    provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Each
    separate use of a computer online service, Internet service,
    local bulletin board service, or any other device capable of
    electronic data storage or transmission wherein an offense
    described in this section is committed may be charged as a
    separate offense.
    (4) Traveling to meet a minor.--Any person who travels any
    distance either within this state, to this state, or from this
    state by any means, who attempts to do so, or who causes
    another to do so or to attempt to do so for the purpose of
    engaging in any illegal act described in chapter 794, chapter
    800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in other unlawful
    -3-
    traveling as charged in this case violate the prohibition against double jeopardy because
    the soliciting offense is subsumed by the traveling offense." Shelley, 
    134 So. 3d at 1142
    . We affirm the conviction and sentence for traveling and vacate the conviction
    and sentence for soliciting. See 
    id.
     We also certify conflict with the First District's
    decision in State v. Murphy, 
    124 So. 3d 323
     (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), as this court did in
    Shelley. See 
    id.
    Affirmed in part and vacated in part; conflict certified.
    LaROSE and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
    sexual conduct with a child or with another person believed
    by the person to be a child after using a computer online
    service, Internet service, local bulletin board service, or any
    other device capable of electronic data storage or
    transmission to:
    (a) Seduce, solicit, lure, or entice or attempt to seduce,
    solicit, lure, or entice a child or another person believed by
    the person to be a child, to engage in any illegal act
    described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to
    otherwise engage in other unlawful sexual conduct with a
    child; or
    (b) Solicit, lure, or entice or attempt to solicit, lure, or entice a
    parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a child or a person
    believed to be a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a
    child to consent to the participation of such child in any act
    described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to
    otherwise engage in any sexual conduct,
    commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as
    provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
    § 847.0135.
    -4-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2D13-6244

Citation Numbers: 154 So. 3d 1168, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 105, 2015 WL 72438

Judges: Khouzam, Larose, Sleet

Filed Date: 1/7/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024