TIMOTHY MCCOY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2006-08-23
No. 4D06-1740
GUNTHER, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
935 So. 2d 1278 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

Timothy McCoy appealed the summary denial of his motion to withdraw a guilty plea to failing to register as a sexual offender in Florida. The court affirmed, holding that McCoy was properly required to register in Florida based on his prior Colorado sexual assault conviction, and that his guilty plea was therefore valid.


Holding

McCoy was required to register as a sexual offender in Florida because he would have been required to register in Colorado had he been a resident there. Therefore, subsection 943.0435(1)(a)3 applies to him, his guilty plea was proper, and defense counsel was not ineffective in permitting him to enter the plea.


Headnotes

[1] A person convicted of a qualifying sexual offense in another jurisdiction is considered a "sexual offender" in Florida if they establish or maintain a residence in Florid…

[2] A prior conviction for a sexual offense in another jurisdiction can trigger Florida's sexual offender registration requirements even if the offender was not subject to re…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“Section 943.0435(l)(a) defines a "sexual offender" as a person convicted of committing specified sexual offenses in Florida or similar offenses in another jurisdiction. In addition, however, the statute requires that the offender also meet the criteria listed in subsections 2, 3, or 4.”

Establishes the statutory framework for determining whether someone must register as a sexual offender in Florida

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

McCoy was convicted of first-degree sexual assault in Colorado in 1991 and released from incarceration on January 3, 1997. He subsequently moved to Fl…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. Appellant, who had registered in Florida as a sexual offender, entered a guilty plea to violating the requirements of section 943.0435(4), Florida Statutes, by failing to report to a driver’s license office within forty-eight hours of changing his address. In his motion, appellant sought to withdraw his plea claiming that he did not commit the charged offense because he was not required to register as a sexual offender in Florida at all. He also claimed that defense counsel was ineffective in permitting him to enter a guilty plea to a crime he did not commit.

In 1991, appellant was convicted of first-degree sexual assault in Colorado. He was released from incarceration for this offense on January 3, 1997. Appellant moved to Florida where he registered as a sexual offender. No evidence was presented that appellant registered as a sex offender in Colorado before coming to Florida.

Section 943.0435(l)(a) defines a “sexual offender” as a person convicted of committing specified sexual offenses in Florida or similar offenses in another jurisdiction. In addition, however, the statute requires that the offender also meet the criteria listed in subsections 2, 3, or 4. No evidence was presented that appellant was under any kind of supervision related to his Colorado conviction, so subsection 4 does not apply. § 943.0435(l)(a)4, Fla. Stat. (2002). Subsection 2 applies to offenders released from the sanction for a qualifying offense on or after October 1, 1997 and does not apply to appellant who was released in January 1997. § 943.0435(l)(a)2, Fla. Stat. (2002).

Subsection 3 reads:

Establishes or maintains a residence in this state and who has not been designated as a sexual predator by a court of this state but who has been designated as a sexual predator, as a sexually violent predator, or by another sexual offender designation in another state or jurisdiction and was, as a result of such designation, subjected to registration or community or public notification, or both, or would be if the person were a resident of that state or jurisdiction; § 943.0435(l)(a)3, Fla. Stat. (2002). Appellant was not designated a sexually violent predator in Colorado only because his conviction predated the effective date of the sexually violent predator statute. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-3-414.5. If appellant resided in Colorado, however, he would be required to register as a sex offender. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-22-103(l)(c). Appellant could be posted on the internet as a convicted sex offender. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-22-111(1.5).

Because appellant would be required to register as a sex offender if he were a resident of Colorado, we find that section 943.0435(l)(a)3, Florida Statutes, applies and appellant was required to register as a sexual offender in Florida. His plea to violating the reporting requirements of section 943.0435(4) was therefore proper, and counsel was not ineffective in allowing him to enter a plea to this offense.

GUNTHER, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Miller v. State, 971 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
    …een convicted of committing specified sexual offenses in Florida or in another jurisdiction and (2) was released from the sanction imposed for the conviction on or after October 1, 1997. § 943.0435(l)(a)l.a.-b„ Fla. Stat. (2006); see McCoy v. State, 935 So. 2d 1278, 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (stating that this section applies to offenders released from sanction for a qualifying offense on or after October 1, 1997). Thus, contrary to Mr. Miller’s position, both Florida sex offenders and non-Florida sex offenders…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw