Case Name: Christopher CHEPELEVICH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2015-10-14
Citations: 184 So. 3d 1138
Docket Number: No. 2D13-6219
Parties: Christopher CHEPELEVICH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: KELLY and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 184
Pages: 1138–1138

Head Matter:
Christopher CHEPELEVICH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 2D13-6219.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Oct. 14, 2015.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Anthony W. Surber, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jonathan, P. Hurley, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appel-lee.

Opinion:
CRENSHAW, Judge.
Christopher Chepelevich challenges his convictions for use of a computer to solicit a child for unlawful sexual activity as criminalized by section 847.0135(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2012), and traveling to meet a child for the purpose of engaging in unlawful sexual activity as criminalized by section 847.0135(4)(a), on the grounds that they violate the prohibition against double jeopardy. "[D]ual convictions for solicitation and traveling after solicitation based upon the same conduct impermissibly place [the defendant] in double jeopar-dy_" State v. Shelley, 176 So.3d 914, (Fla. June 25, 2015). Because his dual convictions were based upon the same conduct, they violate the prohibition against double jeopardy. See Sang Youn Kim v. State, 154 So.3d 1168, 1169-70 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and sentence for traveling and vacate the conviction and sentence for soliciting as the soliciting offense is subsumed by the traveling offense. Id. at 1170.
Affirmed in part and vacated in part.
KELLY and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.
. We reject Chepelevich's other argument raised on appeal without further discussion.