Oliver v. State
The Fifth DCA held that convictions for sexual battery on a minor by a person in familial/custodial authority (§794.011(8)(b)) and unlawful sexual activity with a minor (§794.05) do not violate double jeopardy because each offense requires proof of an element the other does not. The court distinguished the Fourth DCA's Jackson decision and noted the First DCA's Smith decision reached the opposite result via a bare concession without analysis, creating an apparent conflict among the districts.
Key facts
- Oliver was charged and convicted in trial court of both sexual battery on a minor by a person in familial/custodial authority under §794.011(8)(b) and unlawful sexual activity with a minor under §794.05 based on the same conduct.
- Oliver appealed, arguing that the dual convictions and separate sentences violated double jeopardy protection because the two offenses are essentially the same crime.
- +1 more key fact with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion gives prosecutors and defense counsel a detailed elements-comparison template for double jeopardy challenges involving overlapping sex-crime statutes with different victim/offender age requirements, and it… — 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.