BILLY ROY CARTER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2006-09-08
No. 5D05-3731
THOMPSON and PALMER, JJ., concur.
937 So. 2d 1185 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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

Billy Carter appeals a determination that he qualifies as a sexual offender under Florida law based on a 1997 nolo contendere plea to sexual assault of a child in Texas. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Carter's Texas conviction and subsequent release from probation satisfy the statutory requirements for sexual offender classification.


Holding

Carter qualifies as a sexual offender because he was convicted (by nolo contendere plea) of a similar offense in another jurisdiction and was released from his sanction (probation) after October 1, 1997, satisfying both statutory requirements.


Headnotes

[1] A person qualifies as a "sexual offender" under section 943.0435, Florida Statutes, if convicted of a specified sexual offense or a similar offense in another jurisdictio…

[2] For purposes of section 943.0435, Florida Statutes, a "conviction" includes a determination of guilt resulting from a trial or the entry of a guilty or nolo contendere pl…

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

“"Convicted" is expressly defined to mean "that there has been a determination of guilt as a result of a trial or the entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld."”

Establishes that nolo contendere plea with withheld adjudication constitutes 'conviction' under the statute

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

Carter entered a nolo contendere plea on November 19, 1997, to sexual assault of a child under Texas Penal Code § 22.011(a)(2) in Hardin County Distri…

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
LAWSON, J.

LAWSON, J.

Billy Carter appeals from an order determining that he qualifies as a “sexual offender” under section 943.0435, Florida Statutes (2005). We agree with the trial court’s determination, and affirm.

In relevant part, section 943.0435 directs that a person be treated as a sexual offender if he or she has (1) been convicted of one of the sexual offenses enumerated in that statute, or of a “similar offense” in another jurisdiction; and (2) was released from the sanction imposed for the conviction on or after October 1, 1997. “Convicted” is expressly defined to mean “that there has been a determination of guilt as a result of a trial or the entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld.” § 943.0435(l)(b), Fla. Stat. (2005). A “sanction imposed” for a conviction is expressly defined to include probation. § 943.0435(l)(a)2, Fla. Stat. (2005).

The record in this case is clear that Carter pled nolo contendere on November 19, 1997, to the offense of sexual assault of a child in the District Court of Hardin County, Texas. That offense is a violation of Texas Penal Code section 22.011(a)(2), the elements of which are virtually identical to the charge of sexual battery defined in section 794.011, Florida Statutes.1 Adjudication was withheld, and Carter was placed on probation for ten years. After two years, Carter applied for early termination of his probation. Carter’s motion was granted on November 24, 1999. Therefore, he was released from his sanction in Texas after October 1, 1997. By the express térms of section 943.0435, Florida Statutes, Carter therefore qualifies as a sexual offender based upon his 1997 Texas conviction.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON and PALMER, JJ., concur. . The only discernible difference between the two laws is that Florida’s statute provides differing offense levels based upon the age of the child. The Texas statute, by contrast, provides that the intentional or knowing penetration or union of the anus or sexual organ of any child younger than 17 years of age by any means (or the penetration of the mouth of the child by the sexual organ of the actor) constitutes a second degree felony. Sexual battery arising under section 794.011, Florida Statutes, is one of the offenses enumerated in section 943.0435, Florida Statutes.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Moore v. State, 992 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
    …t offense. § 943.0435(1), Fla. Stat.; compare Turner v. State, 937 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (affirming conviction for failure to register based on Minnesota conviction for offense comparable to an enumerated Florida offense); Carter v. State, 937 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (noting that defendant’s Texas conviction was for an offense “virtually identical” to an enumerated Florida offense, thus requiring him to register in Florida). Nor did the State prove that Moore was still under Michigan supervis…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw