Harris v. State
Opinion
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 [346]*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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
157 So. 3d 345 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.