SCOTT JOSEPH TRADER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Scott Joseph Trader appealed his convictions on five counts of child sexual abuse, arguing the circuit court erred by refusing to sever charges related to abuse of two different victims occurring over a three-to-four-year period. The Fourth District Court of Appeal agreed that the charges should have been severed and reversed and remanded for new trials.
The circuit court erred when it refused to sever the charges. Because the alleged abuse involved two different victims at different times over a three-to-four-year period rather than episodic connected acts, the charges should have been severed.
[1] Charges involving separate victims and occurring over a significant period of time should be severed for trial.
[2] Joinder of criminal charges is not warranted when the offenses are connected only by similar circumstances and the accused's alleged guilt in each instance.
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“the "connected acts or transactions" requirement of rule 3.150 means that the acts joined for trial must be considered in an episodic sense. The rules do not warrant joinder or consolidation of criminal charges based on similar but separate episodes, separated in time, which are "connected" only by similar circumstances and the accused's alleged guilt in both or all instances.”
Establishes the legal standard for what constitutes properly joinable charges under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.150(a)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFederal agents executed a search warrant at Trader's home as part of an investigation into soliciting nude photos from a nine-year-old girl. The searc…
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 Connected Acts Or Transactions cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
SCOTT JOSEPH TRADER,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
No. 4D2023-0538
[May 8, 2024]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Lawrence M. Mirman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562016CF003220A.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pablo Tapia, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM. Scott Joseph Trader appeals his five convictions. He argues the circuit court erred when it denied his motion to sever charges related to alleged sexual abuse. We agree with Trader that the court erred when it refused to sever the charges because the alleged abuse involved two victims at different times over a three-to-four-year period. We reverse and remand for new trials.1 As a part of a federal investigation against Trader for soliciting a nine- year-old girl for nude photos, federal agents executed a search warrant at Trader’s home. The search revealed a cache of digital devices containing child pornography. Based on these findings, the State charged Trader with five counts of sex crimes against children under twelve. Counts I and III related to one child, and counts II, IV, and V related to a different child.
2
Trader argues the claims relating to the two children “were not episodically committed[] as in a crime spree” and “were not linked causally to each other.”
Generally, “[t]wo or more offenses . . . may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense, when the offenses . . . are based on the same act or transaction or on 2 or more connected acts or transactions.” Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.150(a). Summarizing this rule, the Florida Supreme Court explained:
[T]he “connected acts or transactions” requirement of rule 3.150 means that the acts joined for trial must be considered in an episodic sense. The rules do not warrant joinder or consolidation of criminal charges based on similar but separate episodes, separated in time, which are “connected” only by similar circumstances and the accused’s alleged guilt in both or all instances. Garcia v. State, 568 So. 2d 896, 899 (Fla. 1990) (cleaned up). And, “‘in child sexual molestation cases, motions to sever should be granted where offenses occurred at different times and places, involving different victims.’” Shermer v. State, 935 So. 2d 74, 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (quoting Roark v. State, 620 So. 2d 237, 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)); see also Ghent v. State, 685 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
Trader allegedly abused different victims at different times over a three- to-four-year period. The circuit court should have severed the charges. As a result, we reverse the convictions and remand for a severed trial.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. MAY, FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Garcia v. State, 568 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1990)
- Roark v. State, 620 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Shermer v. State, 935 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Ghent v. State, 685 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)