JULIO OQUENDO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2009-12-30
No. 2D08-6326
ALTENBERND and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
24 So. 3d 746 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2009)

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.


Holding

The court held that the conviction for promoting a sexual performance of a child must be reversed because the evidence did not establish a 'performance' as defined by statute. The conviction for contributing to the delinquency of a minor is affirmed.


Headnotes

[1] A conviction for promoting a sexual performance by a child requires proof of a "performance" as defined by statute, which includes a visual representation exhibited befor…

[2] A sexual act occurring in a private bedroom with no one else viewing the activity does not constitute a "performance" under the statute prohibiting the promotion of a sex…

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

Facts & Procedural History

A deputy responded to a missing teen report and found the girl at a trailer with the defendant and another man. The girl testified she went to the tra…

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
FULMER, Judge.

FULMER, Judge.

Julio Oquendo appeals from his convictions for promoting the sexual performance of a child and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, in violation of sections 827.071 and 827.04, Florida Statutes (2007).1 We reverse the conviction for promoting a sexual performance but affirm the conviction for contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

Deputy Anderson received a complaint of a missing sixteen-year-old girl. The mother told the deputy that the girl had gone for a walk four hours earlier and had not returned. The deputy spoke to other family members and was given information that directed him to a trailer two or three *747blocks away where the girl had been seen in the past. The deputy approached the trailer and heard loud music playing. Through an open window, he could see a large television with a pornographic movie playing. The missing girl was seated between two men on a couch in front of the television. Oquendo was one of the men.

Deputy Anderson stepped back from the window and called for backup. When the backup deputy arrived a few minutes later, Deputy Anderson knocked on the door. Oquendo came to the door alone, and Deputy Anderson explained that he was investigating the report of a missing girl and asked to search the residence. Oquendo denied that she was in the home and refused to let him in.

A third deputy, Deputy Osborne, arrived at the scene, and because he knew Oquen-do by his first name from working in the area, he was able to gain Oquendo’s consent to go in the house to retrieve the missing girl. While Deputy Osborne was at the front door with Oquendo, a Hispanic male in his twenties came out from the back bedroom. The Hispanic male indicated that he did not speak English. Deputy Osborne proceeded to the back bedroom, found the girl sitting on the floor getting dressed, and advised her to get up. While he was escorting her out of the house, he noticed Oquendo trying to conceal a crack pipe.

The girl testified at trial that she knew Oquendo from working with him cleaning houses. He was aware that she was sixteen. She saw him when she was out walking, and he wanted to show her his new TV. She went in the house, and they began smoking crack together. Another man came over and was speaking Spanish with Oquendo, which the girl did not understand. Oquendo asked the girl if she would go to the back room with the other man. She knew that Oquendo meant for her to have sex to get the money for her drugs. The Hispanic man gave Oquendo money to have sex with the girl. The girl consented, went in the back room, and had sex with the man. The door was shut, and no one else was in the room.

After the State rested, the defense moved for a judgment of acquittal, arguing that the evidence did not show a sexual performance, where the sexual activity had occurred in a private bedroom with no one else viewing the activity. The trial court denied the motion.

Section 827.071, Florida Statutes (2007), provides, in part:

(2) A person is guilty of the use of a child in a sexual performance if, knowing the character and content thereof, he or she employs, authorizes, or induces a child less than 18 years of age to engage in a sexual performance or, being a parent, legal guardian, or custodian of such child, consents to the participation by such child in a sexual performance. Whoever violates this subsection is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) A person is guilty of promoting a sexual performance by a child when, knowing the character and content thereof, he or she produces, directs, or promotes any performance which includes sexual conduct by a child less than 18 years of age. Whoever violates this subsection is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Subsection (l)(b) of section 827.071, defines “performance” as “any play, motion picture, photograph, or dance or any other visual representation exhibited before an audience.” Subsection (l)(h) defines “sexual performance” as “any performance or *748part thereof which includes sexual conduct by a child of less than 18 years of age.”

We agree with Oquendo that the State failed to prove a prima facie case of guilt under section 827.071 because there was no “performance,” as that term is defined in subsection (l)(b) of the statute, shown by the evidence.2 Therefore, we reverse the conviction for promoting the sexual performance of a child and remand for the trial court to discharge Oquendo on that count.

We reject Oquendo’s second argument alleging improper comments by the prosecutor.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

ALTENBERND and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw