Lai v. State
The Sixth DCA held that a jury verdict finding the defendant guilty of sexual battery by penetration, while also making a special verdict finding that no penetration occurred, was a 'truly inconsistent' verdict because the special finding directly negated a necessary element of the charged offense. The court further held this was fundamental error reviewable despite lack of preservation because it resulted in a conviction on an uncharged theory of the offense, and reversed and remanded for entry of judgment on the lesser-included offense of battery with resentencing.
Key facts
- Defendant was charged with and convicted by jury of sexual battery by penetration.
- The jury returned a special verdict finding that no penetration occurred, directly negating an essential element of the charged offense.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is a first-impression ruling for the newly created Sixth DCA, aligning it with the First, Second, and Fourth Districts on the truly-inconsistent-verdict doctrine and extending it to a species of inconsistency not… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.