Sherman v. State (272 So. 3d 829, 2019)

Per Curiam.

We twice earlier affirmed Appellant's separate convictions for solicitation (in violation of section 847.0135(3)(a), Florida Statutes ), and traveling to meet a minor after solicitation (in violation of section 847.0135(4)(a) ). See Sherman v. State , 160 So. 3d 494 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ; Sherman v. State , 247 So. 3d 663 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). The Florida Supreme Court has now quashed our more recent decision, remanding for reconsideration in light of Lee v. State , 258 So. 3d 1297 (Fla. 2018). See Sherman v. State , No. SC18-949 (Fla. Apr. 16, 2019). In Lee , the court held that "to determine whether multiple convictions of solicitation of a minor, unlawful use of a two-way communications device, and traveling after solicitation of a minor are based upon the same conduct for purposes of double jeopardy, the reviewing court should consider only the charging document." 258 So. 3d at 1299. Applying that rule here, we must reverse the lesser conviction. On remand, the trial court should resentence for the remaining conviction. We otherwise affirm.

REVERSED in part; AFFIRMED in part.

Wolf and Winsor, JJ., concur; Makar, J., concurs in result only.