{"id":1762,"date":"2019-10-14T10:55:19","date_gmt":"2019-10-14T15:55:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?p=1762"},"modified":"2019-10-15T09:59:15","modified_gmt":"2019-10-15T14:59:15","slug":"demus-v-state-fla-dist-ct-app-2019","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2019\/10\/14\/demus-v-state-fla-dist-ct-app-2019\/","title":{"rendered":"Demus v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Demus v. State, No. 4D17-3497 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)<\/h2>\n

Nature of Case: <\/strong><\/strong> Appellant was convicted in Florida state court of two counts of failing to register as a sex offender for not complying with state statutes that mandated registration of his residence within 48 hours of any change. Appellant had been released from state custody in 2015, and did not report a residence within 48 hours. Trial court denied Appellant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal.\u00a0Appellant was convicted and sought review.<\/p>\n

Holding: <\/strong> Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s denial for Appellant’s motion of acquittal. State prosecutors never established that Appellant changed or moved residences within Broward County without registering, and therefore reversed the conviction as the state failed to prove the elements of the offense.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Case Documents<\/em><\/h2>\n