Pickel v. State
This text of 132 So. 3d 294 (Pickel v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
A jury found Norman Pickel guilty of two counts of sexual battery on a child less than twelve years of age, kidnapping of a child under thirteen years of age, burglary with a battery, and lewd or lascivious molestation. On appeal, the defendant challenges his convictions for these crimes, arguing error in evidentiary rulings and insisting convictions for both sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation violate double jeopardy.1 We affirm the challenged evidentiary rulings without further comment. As for the double jeopardy argument, as acknowledged by the defendant, this court has resolved this issue adversely to him. See Darville v. State, 995 So.2d 1025 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (holding dual convictions for sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation do not violate double jeopardy as each offense contains an element the other lacks). We certify conflict with Drawdy v. State, 98 So.3d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), review granted, 116 So.3d 1263 (Fla.2013), regarding application of the Blockburgeff same elements test to the offenses of sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation.
Affirmed; conflict certified.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
132 So. 3d 294, 2014 WL 52454, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pickel-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.