RICKY HARRIS, 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.
Ricky Harris appeals his convictions for internet-based child exploitation offenses. The court affirmed his convictions but reversed the special condition imposing costs of incarceration as part of his probation and remanded for correction of a scrivener's error in the judgment regarding Count 2.
The court reversed the special probation condition imposing costs of incarceration and remanded for its removal, though the trial court retains authority to enter a civil restitution lien order on remand. The court also remanded for correction of the Count 2 judgment to reflect a conviction for use of the internet to lure a child under the correct statutory provision (section 847.0135(3)(a), Florida Statutes), consistent with Harris's plea.
[1] A conviction for use of the internet to lure a child may be based on an information that properly pleads the elements of the offense, even if the information erroneously…
[2] A judgment must be corrected to accurately reflect the offense to which a defendant pled, even if the original information contained a statutory citation error.
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“We reverse only that portion of Harris' probation order imposing the cost of incarceration as a special condition and remand for removal of that condition.”
Establishes the primary holding regarding the reversal of the incarceration cost condition
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarris was convicted of four offenses: using the internet to lure a parent of a child, using the internet to lure a child, traveling to meet a minor f…
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 Elements Of An Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
Ricky Harris appeals his convictions for Count 1, use of the internet to lure a parent of a child; Count 2, use of the internet to lure a child;- Count 3, traveling *346to meet a minor for illegal sexual conduct; and Count 4, attempted lewd or lascivious battery of a child 12 years of age or older but less than 16 years of age. We reverse only that portion of Harris’ probation order imposing the cost of incarceration as a special condition and remand for removal of that condition.1 We remand also for correction of a scriveneFs error in the judgment. In Count 2 of the information, the State named the offense charged as use of the internet to lure a child and recited the elements for that offense, but cited to section 847.0135(3)(b), Florida Statutes, the statutory provision proscribing use of the internet to lure a parent of a child.2 The judgment identifies the offense for which Harris was convicted on Count 2 as use of the internet to lure a parent of a child, whereas the order of sex offender probation identifies the offense for which Harris was convicted on Count 2 as use of the internet to lure a child. • The record indicates that, as to Count 2, Harris pled to use of the internet to lure a child, not use of the internet to lure a parent of a child. Accordingly, Harris’ judgment needs to be corrected to reflect a conviction on Count 2 for use of the internet to lure a child, pursuant to section 847.0135(3)(a), Florida Statutes. In all other respects, we affirm.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with instructions.
PALMER, LAWSON and BERGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Slaughter v. State, 834 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
- Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 27 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)