Sexual Battery

Sexual Battery: Most often thought of as the unlawful sexual intercourse by one person against another or Rape. Sexual Battery as defined by Florida Statute 794.011 means oral, anal or vaginal penetration by, or union with the sexual organ of another or the vaginal or anal penetration of another by any object. It does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose. The age of the perpetrator and age of the victim also present different penalties for committing sexual battery.

Lewd or Lascivious Offenses: Charges are some times filed as Lewd or Lascivious instead of sexual battery. This deals with “Sexual activity” which means the oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by or union with the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object. Sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose. Florida Statute 800.04 Further Lewd or Lascivious exhibition such as masturbation in public is a criminal offense.

Case Law Update

Unlawful sexual intercourse by person knowingly infected with HIV — Statute applies to sexual conduct involving homosexual oral and anal sex — Trial court erred in dismissing information on ground that statute is limited to heterosexual vaginal sex.

Solicitation Child Under 16

Solicitation of child under age sixteen to commit lewd or lascivious conduct — Jury instructions — Error to instruct jury that state was required to prove that defendant solicited either the twelve-year-old girl whom defendant originally began texting or “another person he believed to be” this girl to commit a lewd or lascivious act — For completed offense of solicitation of child under age sixteen to commit lewd or lascivious act, solicitation must be directed to someone under age sixteen, and it is not enough for a defendant to believe victim is under age sixteen — Evidence that defendant solicited detective pretending to be twelve-year-old girl was not sufficient to support conviction — Although state contends there was evidence that defendant directly solicited girl, jury was given improper instructions concerning offense, and general verdict used in the case makes it impossible for appellate court to determine whether defendant was convicted based on jury’s conclusion that defendant solicited detective — Error was fundamental and requires reversal for new trial to extent there is evidence that defendant directly solicited girl under age sixteen