Opinion ID: 220374
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: State Court Plea

Text: In May 2004 in Florida state court, Lamontagne pled nolo contendere to two counts of lewd or lascivious molestation of a victim less than twelve years of age, in violation of Florida Statutes § 800.04(5)(b). In exchange for his plea, the State agreed to dismiss a third count of capital sexual battery, which would have exposed Lamontagne to a mandatory life sentence. As part of the plea agreement, Lamontagne also pled nolo contendere to 58 counts of possession of material depicting sexual conduct by a child, in violation of Florida Statutes § 827.071(5).1 These 58 offenses were charged in a separate criminal indictment and arose from child pornography found on Lamontagne’s computer during the child molestation investigation. The State and Lamontagne agreed to a sentence of 25 years imprisonment and 15 years of sex offender 1 There were originally 62 counts of possession of child pornography, but the State agreed to drop four counts after Lamontagne’s trial counsel met with the State prosecutor and reviewed all of the images. 2 probation on the § 800.04(5)(b) child molestation charges and to concurrent 5 year imprisonment terms on the § 827.071(5) child pornography charges. According to the state trial court transcript, the State prosecutor provided these facts to establish the factual basis for Lamontagne’s plea: (1) on the night of October 25, 2003, the six-year-old victim and her mother, who was dating Lamontagne at the time, spent the night at Lamontagne’s residence; (2) twice during the night Lamontagne entered the victim’s bedroom and had inappropriate sexual contact with her; (3) during one of Lamontagne’s visits, he photographed the victim’s vaginal area; (4) following Lamontagne’s arrest, police found over 240 images of child pornography on the computer in Lamontagne’s residence, which had resulted in the 58 counts of possession of child pornography; and (5) Lamontagne confessed to downloading some of the images of child pornography the day before the victim and her mother spent the night at his house. The state trial court asked Lamontagne whether he objected to State’s facts, and Lamontagne responded that he did not. The state trial court found there was a sufficient factual basis for the pleas and that Lamontagne’s pleas were knowing and voluntary. The state trial court adjudged Lamontagne guilty of both offenses. Lamontagne voluntarily dismissed his direct criminal appeal. Lamontagne is currently serving his sentences. 3