HUBERT ROMAGE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Hubert Romage was convicted of sexual battery and three counts of lewd and lascivious molestation of a minor arising from a single criminal episode. The appellate court reversed two of the three molestation convictions on double jeopardy grounds, holding that multiple convictions cannot arise from a single episode in one location without meaningful temporal breaks between acts.
Multiple convictions arising from a single episode in one location without meaningful temporal breaks between acts violate double jeopardy principles. Accordingly, Romage's convictions on the second and third lewd and lascivious molestation counts were vacated, leaving him with one count of sexual battery and one count of lewd and lascivious molestation.
[1] Convictions for multiple counts of lewd and lascivious molestation arising from a single criminal episode in one location without a meaningful temporal break between acts…
[2] Claims based on an alleged violation of double jeopardy constitute fundamental error that may be raised for the first time on appeal absent a knowing and voluntary waiver…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“double jeopardy permitted conviction on only one count where both acts arose from a single episode in one location without a meaningful temporal break between acts”
Establishes the legal standard for multiple molestation convictions arising from a single episode
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRomage committed a three-minute sexual assault on a minor victim in a single location. During this episode, he pushed the victim onto a bed, rolled up…
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 Lewd Or Lascivious Molestation cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, J.
Hubert Romage appeals his judgment and sentence for sexual battery1 and three counts of lewd and lascivious molestation2 of a minor resulting from a three-minute criminal episode in which he pushed the victim onto a bed, rolled up her shirt to touch her breasts, digitally penetrated her vagina and then unsuccessfully attempted penile penetration.
The State charged and a jury found Romage guilty of sexual battery and three separate counts of lewd and lascivious molestation, one each for: (1) touching the breasts, (2) digital penetration,' and (3) penile touching of the vagina. He complains that the convictions for three counts of lewd and lascivious molestation should be reduced to a single count because the acts leading to the convictions occurred in one location without a meaningful temporal break between each act.
King v. State, 834 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), supports Romage’s complaint. The defendant in King appealed his conviction for two counts of lewd and lascivious molestation for touching an 11-year-old victim’s breasts and for placing his penis in contact with the victim’s buttocks while she rested on a sofa. The victim testified that the entire episode happened in a “very short time period.” Id. at 312. This court affirmed the conviction on the first count, but reversed on the second count and remanded for re-sentencing stating that double jeopardy permitted conviction on only one count where both acts arose from a single episode in one location without a meaningful temporal break between acts. Likewise, Romage’s attacks on the victim occurred during a single episode in a single location without a meaningful temporal break between acts. Accordingly, Romage’s conviction and sentence on the second and third lewd and lascivious molestation counts are vacated, and we remand for re-sentencing based upon our affirmance of one count of sexual battery and one count of lewd and lascivious molestation.
The State’s argument that Romage failed to preserve the error by objecting before the trial court has no merit. Claims based on an alleged violation of double jeopardy constitute fundamental error which, absent a knowing and voluntary waiver, may be raised for the first time on appeal. See, e.g., State v. Johnson, 483 So. 2d 420, 422 (Fla.1986); Barfield v. State, 871 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED.
SAWAYA, C.J., and MONACO, J., concur. . § 794.011(5), Fla. Stat. (2001).
. § 800.04(5)(c)(2), Fla. Stat. (2001).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bertram L. Capron v. State, 948 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…. Mr. Capron's failure to raise his double jeopardy challenge to his convictions and sentences at trial is not fatal to this Court's consideration of this issue because a double jeopardy violation constitutes fundamental error. See Romage v. State, 890 So. 2d 550, 551 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); see also Gisi v. State, 848 So. 2d 1278, 1281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). However, it would have been helpful to the trial court if trial counsel had raised the issue below, as was his duty. Mr. Capron’s appellate counsel did not r…
-
Phynerrian Q. Manning v. Tunnell, 943 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…. Turnpike Commercial Plaza, Phase II, Condominium Ass’n, Inc., 894 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)(explaining that sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment may be raised for the first time on appeal in a non-jury trial); Romage v. State, 890 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)(holding that claims based on an alleged violation of double jeopardy constitute fundamental error which, absent a knowing and voluntary waiver, may be raised for the first time on appeal); Bank One, N.A. v. Batronie, 884 So. 2d 3…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Johnson, 483 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1986)
- Barfield v. State, 871 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- King v. State, 834 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)