Payne v. State of Florida, 2D99-928
| Citation | 753 So.2d 129 |
| Decision Date | 12 January 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D99-928,2D99-928 |
| Parties | (Fla.App. 2 Dist. 2000) RANDALL JAMES PAYNE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Maynard F. Swanson, Jr., Judge.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Timothy J. Ferreri, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, nd Jenny S. Sieg, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Randall Payne appeals from the final order designating him to be a sexual predator pursuant to section 775.21(4)(c), Florida Statutes (1997). We affirm.
Payne, who was a juvenile at the time of the offense, was charged as an adult with four counts of sexual battery. He entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charges. The trial court exercised its discretion to adjudicate and sentence Payne as a juvenile pursuant to section 985.233, Florida Statutes (1997). The court retained jurisdiction on the issue of classification as a sexual predator. No appeal was taken from this disposition. At a later hearing, the court determined Payne to be a sexual predator and entered an order classifying him as such. This appeal arises from that order.
As a prerequisite to classification as a sexual predator, section 775.21(4) of the Florida Sexual Predators Act requires that the defendant have a "conviction" for a qualifying offense. Payne argues that because section 985.233(4)(b) provides that an adjudication of delinquency "shall not be deemed a conviction," he does not meet the Act's criteria. We disagree because of the unique nature of section 775.21. As we determined in Collie v. State, 710 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), the provisions of section 775.21 are not a form of punishment, but rather a procedure to protect our children and the public at large from predatory sexual activity. To that end, we determine that Payne was "convicted" pursuant to section 775.21(4)(e) at the time he entered a plea of nolo contendere to adult charges of sexual battery. The fact that the trial court thereafter elected to treat Payne as a juvenile for sentencing purposes does not affect his status under section 775.21, which attached at the time of his plea.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelly v. State
...these policy objectives, the courts have recognized that the designation is neither a sentence nor a punishment. Payne v. State, 753 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 773 So.2d 56 (Fla. 2000); Burkett v. State, 731 So.2d 695, 698 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 892 (Fla.1998); Ric......
-
State v. JM
...ANSTEAD, C.J. We have for review J.M. v. State, 783 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), which certified conflict with Payne v. State, 753 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).1 We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we approve the decision of......
-
JM v. State, 1D00-2709.
...that classifying J.M. as a sexual predator was inappropriate under these facts, it concluded that it was bound to do so by Payne v. State, 753 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2d DCA),review denied, 773 So.2d 56 (Fla. Payne was a juvenile who pled nolo contendere to four counts of sexual battery and was adj......
-
TRB v. State, 1D01-883.
...to be a sexual predator pursuant to section 775.21, Florida Statutes, the sexual-predator statute, under the authority of Payne v. State, 753 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2nd DCA), review denied, 773 So.2d 56 (Fla.2000). On appeal, T.R.B. argues that although he was prosecuted as an adult, he was given ......