Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 934.215 (2025)
Unlawful use of a two-way communications device.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
934.215 Unlawful use of a two-way communications device.—Any person who uses a two-way communications device, including, but not limited to, a portable two-way wireless communications device, to facilitate or further the commission of any felony offense commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 934.215
M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd§934.215PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESUSE 2 WAY COMM DEVICE TO FACIL FELONY
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: State of Florida v. Brian Mitchell Lee, 223 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
State of Florida v. Brian Mitchell Lee, 223 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). “26 § 934.215, Fla. Stat. (2013). 61 a computer to facilitate or solicit sexual conduct with a person believed to be a child (“solicitation”).”
Brian Mitchell Lee v. State of Florida, 258 So. 3d 1297 (Fla. 2018). “§ 934.215, Fla. Stat. (2013). Finally, the traveling after solicitation statute provides in pertinent part: *1302 (4) Traveling to meet a minor.”
Holubek v. State, 173 So. 3d 1114 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). “His second argument, raised for the first time 'on appeal, is that his conviction in Count 1 under section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2013), violates double jeopardy because the elements are subsumed into either Count 2 under section 847.”
Batchelor v. State, 193 So. 3d 1054 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). “0135(4)(b) and unlawful use of a two-way communications device under section 934.215. The State alleged in a second amended information that Mr.”
Mizner v. State, 154 So. 3d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). “0135(4)(b), a second-degree felony; Count 3, unlawful use of a two-way communications device in violation of section 934.215, Florida, Statutes (2011), a third-degree felony; and Count 4, attempt to commit sexual battery by a person eighteen years of age or older upon a child…”
Alan Lynsdale Hamilton v. State of Florida, 163 So. 3d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). “0135(4), Florida Statutes (2013), and unlawful use of a two-way communications device under section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2013), violate double jeopardy, and therefore vacate his judgment and sentence for unlawful use of a two-way communications device.”
David Leon Lashley v. State of Florida, 194 So. 3d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). “0135(4), Florida Statutes (2013), and unlawful use of a two-way communications device under section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2013), violate double jeopardy).”
David F. Honaker v. State, 199 So. 3d 1068 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). “We also find that Appellant’s dual convictions for unlawful use of a two-way communications device, in violation of section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2012), and traveling after solicitation violate double jeopardy.”
Holt v. State, 173 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). “It provides, “Any person who uses a two-way communications device, including, but not limited to, a portable two-way wireless communications device, to facilitate or further the commission of any felony offense commits a felony of the third degree.”
Exantus v. State, 198 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). “0135(2), (4), Florida Statutes (2011), or section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2011).”
Weitz v. State, 229 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). “0138, Florida Statutes (2012), and unlawfully using a two-way communications device under section 934.215, Florida Statutes (2012), violate double jeopardy.”
Gennette v. State, 124 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). “Edwin Gennette appeals his conviction and sentence for one count of unlawful use of a two-way communications device to facilitate a felony, in violation of section 934.215, Florida Statutes. The conviction was based on Appellant’s plea of nolo con-tendere, entered after the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.