Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...tection of qualified immunity. But even if the omitted information had been included in the affidavits, there would still have been probable cause to believe each of the Appellees had engaged in a scheme to defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)....

...The 4  Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 5 of 29 affidavit urged that there was probable cause to charge Paez with one count of an Organized Scheme to Defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)(a)(3) and one count of Grand Theft in violation of Florida Statute § 812.014(2)(c). The Peters affidavit, also signed by Loyal and Mulvey, found that Peters engaged in 199.5 hours of unrecorded off-duty work, which would have required him to pay $997.50 in administrative fees to the Town....

...during hours he was listed as having worked for the GBPD, resulting in $1,380.12 of apparent “double compensation” from the Department. The affidavit said there was probable cause to charge Peters with one count of an Organized Scheme to Defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)(a)(3), eleven counts of Official Misconduct in violation of Florida Statute § 838.022, one count of Grand Theft in violation of Florida Statute § 812.014, and one count of False and Fraudulent Insurance Claims in violation of Florida Statute § 817.234....

...having worked for the GBPD, resulting in $312.00 of apparent “double compensation” from the Department. The affidavit claimed that there was probable cause to charge Diaz with one count of an Organized Scheme to Defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)(a)(3), two counts of Official Misconduct in violation of Florida Statute § 838.022, and one count of Grand Theft in violation of Florida Statute § 812.014(2)(c). B. After the...

...Our only question, 17  Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 18 of 29 then, is whether the affidavits still would have established probable cause to believe the officers had violated Florida Statute § 817.034(4), if they had included the omitted information that they knew about....

... Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 20 of 29 asserted probable cause to charge each of the three law enforcement officers with engaging in an organized scheme to defraud in violation of the Florida Communications Fraud Act, Florida Statute § 817.034. The relevant provision of Florida’s penal code makes it a crime to “engage[] in a scheme to defraud and obtain[] property thereby.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(4)(a). “Property” is defined as “anything of value.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(3)(c)....

...A “scheme to defraud” is “a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(3)(d)....

...Having repeatedly and deceptively failed to report off-duty work hours and having thereby deprived the Town of fees to which it was rightfully entitled, the Appellees appeared to have engaged in a “systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(3). Probable cause, then, comes down to this: since Paez, Peters, and Diaz repeatedly 20  Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 21 of 29 withheld relevant informat...

...product liability claimants. (Corrigenda Exh. 5, Count I and Exh. 6, Count I). The predicate acts, or incidents of criminal activity, allegedly include multiple acts of (1) organized fraud and communications fraud in violation of Florida Statutes §§ 817.034(4)(a) and 817.034(4)(b), (2) false affidavit perjury in violation of Florida Statutes § 322.33, perjury in official proceedings and by contradictory statements in violation of Florida Statues §§ 837.02 and 837.021, (3) tampering with witnesses *1259 in viol...

...(iii) Reasonable Reliance: Organized and Communications Fraud and Mail and Wire Fraud Two of the incidents Plaintiff-Growers seek to allege as part of a pattern of criminal activity are organized fraud and communications fraud in violation of *1263 Florida Statutes §§ 817.034(4)(a) and 817.034(4)(b), and mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C....

...ook to the federal Act as persuasive authority on Florida's RICO. Thus, I will use the same standards in assessing the viability of Plaintiff-Growers' organized and communications fraud claims, which allege state law violations ( see Florida Statute § 817.034(b)), and mail and wire fraud claims, which allege federal law violations....

...Plaintiff-Growers represented in the underlying action by Sheehe & Vendittelli allege direct involvement in Fred Henry's Petals of Paradise and KHD, Ltd., in which three out of the ten alleged predicate acts occurred. (Corrigenda at Exh. 5 ¶¶ 23, 25, 28, alleging violations of *1266 Fla Stats. §§ 817.034(4)(a) and (b), 837.02 and 837.021, and 918.13, respectively)....

...Tell them that I told you to call the people or that you got mixed up." Completed but unprocessed credit card slips were recovered from the appellant's residence by officers. The appellant was convicted and sentenced as follows: *525 Organized fraud, section 817.034(3), (4) Florida Statutes (1987): No sentence imposed....

...The reason is that all the elements of theft are included within the elements of organized fraud, making them, for double jeopardy purposes, the "same" offense. The appellant contends that the statute which defines and prescribes punishments for the offense of organized fraud, section 817.034, Florida Statutes (1987), was intended by the legislature to consolidate and "contain" the offenses of theft, forgery, and uttering a false instrument....

...sented at trial or the facts as alleged in a particular information. State v. Carpenter, 417 So.2d 986, 988 (Fla. 1982). We must analyze the statutes in question to determine whether each offense in question has elements which the others do not. [2] Section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), provides that, "Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud ..." Subsection 817.034(3)(d) defines a "scheme to defraud" as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act." According to subsection 817.034(3)(c), "property" means anything of value, and under subsection 817.034(3)(b), "obtain" means "temporarily or permanently to deprive any person of the right to property or a benefit therefrom, or to appropriate the property to one's own use or to the use of any other person not entitled thereto." The offe...

...Williams and Dwyer timely filed their answers, affirmative defenses and counterclaims. This appeal concerns the counterclaims brought by Williams and Dwyer against Peak Resort, Peak Financial, Peak, Simkin, and Cawal, which are as follows: (1) Count I—violation of Florida's Communications Fraud Act, section 817.034, Florida Statutes (1991); (2) Count II—common law fraud; (3) Count III—breach of agreement; (4) Count IV— quantum meruit; and (5) Count V—breach of de facto employment agreement as to Williams only....

...ticipate in the affairs of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of section 895.03(4), Florida Statutes (1993), and of obtaining $50,000 or more by organized fraud in violation of the Florida Communications Fraud Act, section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (1993)....

..."conspiracy which encompassed repeated acts within the state"); Carone v. State, 361 So.2d 437, 437-38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). The state alleged substantive offenses, moreover, that have elements that were results or effects occurring in Florida. Under section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (1993), any "person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby ......

...[2] *213 The state proved the conspiracy that gave rise to the enterprise, that Mr. Black was part of the conspiracy and the enterprise, and that the organized fraud in which the conspirators engaged damaged Escambia County in an amount exceeding $50,000, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (1993)....

...activity so as to meet the definition of `pattern of racketeering activity' under the Florida RICO Act." State v. Lucas, 600 So.2d 1093, 1096 (Fla.1992). The evidence that Escambia County was defrauded in an amount exceeding $50,000, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, was also sufficient....

...Therefore, the trial court's denial of Sewall's motion for judgment of acquittal as to the charge of grand theft was proper. III. Organized Fraud Sewall also contends that the court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of organized fraud. Section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that, "Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud ..." Section 817.034(3)(d) defines a "scheme to defraud" as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations,...

...§ 921.0016(1)(n). The trial court did not err when it sentenced Sewall to a departure sentence. The conviction and departure sentence is affirmed. AFFIRMED. SHARP, W. and PLEUS, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Fla. Stat. § 812.014(1) (1995). [2] Fla. Stat. § 817.034(4) (1995)....

...§ 812.014(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1987) followed by 2 years' probation on each count, Two Counts of Third Degree Grand Theft 5 years' imprisonment § 812.014(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (1987) on each count Three Counts of Organized Fraud 13 years' incarceration, § 817.034(4)(a)1, Fla. Stat. (1987) followed by 7 years' probation on each count, concurrent with each other One Count of Organized Fraud 13 years' imprisonment, § 817.034(4)(a)2, Fla. Stat. (1987) followed by 2 years' probation One Count of Organized Fraud 5 years' imprisonment § 817.034(4)(a)3, Fla....

...that form the basis of the charges in: Count 4 Third Degree Organized Fraud, Count 6 First Degree Organized Fraud, Count 8 First Degree Organized Fraud, Count 13 Second Degree Organized Fraud, and Count 14 Third Degree Organized Fraud, respectively. Section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), reads: Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud... . Section 817.034(3)(d) defines "scheme to defraud" as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with the intent to defraud one or more persons, or with the intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentation of a future act." Id. Section 817.034(3)(c) defines "property" as "anything of value," and section 817.034(3)(b) defines "obtain" as to temporarily or permanently deprive "any person of the right to property or a benefit therefrom, or to appropriate the property to one's own use or to the use of any other person not entitled thereto." Id....

...However, every element of theft is included in the elements of organized fraud. The "endeavor to obtain or use" language in the theft statute is not a necessary element of theft, as a prima facie case may be set forth that alleges the defendant "obtained or used." And, since organized fraud under section 817.034(4)(a) would require the defendant "obtain[s] property," theft would necessarily be included in each organized fraud offense....

...SECL sued FPC and Franciulli, as FPC's agent, in Florida, for damages under the Florida Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, § 895.02, Fla. Stat. (1987), Florida Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act, § 772.102, Fla. Stat. (1987), theft, Florida Communications Fraud Act, § 817.034, Fla....

...A trial court should not grant a judgment of acquittal unless the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the State, does not present a prima facie case of guilt. Lester v. State, 891 So.2d 1219, 1220 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). In this case, the State charged Mrs. Pizzo with organized fraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), which provides that "[a]ny person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud." "Scheme to defraud" is defined as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act." § 817.034(3)(d)....

...e of another person not entitled to the property. Louberti v. State, 895 So.2d 479, 480-81 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Contrary to Mrs. Pizzo's argument, there is no requirement that the defendant actually communicate as part of the scheme to defraud under section 817.034(4)(a)....

...We affirm, concluding not only that the argument was waived by appellant's request, but also that given the totality of the circumstances the instruction was not fundamental error. Appellant and his co-defendant were charged by amended information with committing organized fraud, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (2001)....

...Chad A. Young petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. Const. For the reasons set forth below, we deny the petition. Young is serving a prison sentence for a first-degree felony violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1995), the Florida Communications Fraud Act (FCFA)....

...e any money, he had never been kidnapped, beaten, or cut, and he was, in fact, the voice of the "kidnapper" who telephoned his grandparents seeking to extort money. In January 1997, Young pled guilty to first-degree scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1995) and, in April 1997, was sentenced to two years on community control....

...o expire, end, or terminate, or that would result in a prisoner's release, prior to serving a minimum of 85 percent of the sentence imposed. § 944.275(4)(b)3, Fla. Stat. (1997) (emphasis added). Moreover, because a scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1 is a true continuing offense, we find that Young's crime was "committed" *903 in 1996....

...not be required to serve 85% of his sentence. [4] We make this determination because we hold, as did the Fourth District in Rosen v. State, 757 So.2d 1236, 1238 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), that the crime of scheme to defraud/organized fraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1 is actually a true continuing offense under Toussie v....

...Appellant initially argues that his conviction for organized scheme to defraud was based on insufficient evidence because there was no evidence he made a communication inducing the handing over of property. Appellant was charged with a violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (2003), which makes it a first-degree felony to obtain property by means of a scheme to defraud if the aggregate value of the property obtained is $50,000 or more. Appellant argues that this statute was intended to punish those who communicate fraudulent information to cause or induce the payment of money for worthless purposes. The notion that section 817.034(4)(a) requires a defendant to have made a communication has previously been raised and *1230 rejected. In State v. Summerlot, 711 So.2d 589, 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), the court held that "the state is not required to prove that a defendant `communicated' as a part of a scheme to defraud charged pursuant to section 817.034(4)(a)." See also Pizzo v. State, 910 So.2d 287, 290 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). We hold that communication is not required to sustain a conviction under section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes, and affirm appellant's conviction for organized scheme to defraud....

...Rather than grand theft, the State charged her with engaging in an organized scheme to defraud. The jury found her guilty. On appeal the issue is whether her month long use of the stolen debit card constitutes an "organized fraud" within the meaning of § 817.034(4)(a), Fla....

...Finally, we think it equally apparent that each transaction was undertaken by her to appropriate the proceeds from the account for her own use even though she was not entitled to do so. The evidence thus constitutes a prima facie case of violating § 817.034(3)....

...$200, $60, $200. [2] "Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud." The term "scheme to defraud" is defined as an "ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons. ..." § 817.034(3)(d), Fla....

...Appellant, Patricia Taccariello, appeals a guidelines departure sentence imposed after guilty pleas in each of two consolidated cases. We reverse and remand. In each case, appellant pled guilty to grand theft in violation of sections 812.014(1), (2)(b) and (c), Florida Statutes, organized scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)(2), Florida Statutes, and exploitation of the elderly in violation of section 415.111(5), Florida Statutes (1991)....

..."Scheme to defraud" means a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a false act. § 817.034(3)(d), Fla....

...Therefore, we affirm Kipping's conviction, but reverse and remand with directions that the trial court resentence him within the guidelines. Kipping, along with his older brother, Robert Kipping (hereinafter "Robert"), and David D. Andrews (hereinafter "Andrews"), was charged with a scheme to defraud pursuant to section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), and twenty-two counts of grand theft....

...From these facts as stated, Plaintiffs claim that Defendants engaged in behavior that violated 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a) [9] [Count I], § 1962(b) [Count II], § 1962(c) [Count III], § 1962(d) [Count IV], F.S. § 772.103(1) [10] [Count V], § 772.103(2) [Count VI], § 772.103(3) [Count VII], § 772.103(4) [Count VIII], F.S. § 817.034 "Florida Communications Fraud Act" [Count IX] [11] , Common Law Fraud [Count X], Negligent Misrepresentation [Count XI], Interference with Contract [Count XII], Unjust Enrichment [Count XIII], F.S....

...ould, and each victim was out the money. The jury found appellant guilty of organized scheme to defraud, but not guilty on the two counts of grand theft on which the organized scheme to defraud was based. The crime of scheme to defraud is defined in section 817.034(3)(d), Florida Statutes (1999): [A] systematic ongoing course of conduct with the intent to defraud one or more persons, or with the intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act. The crime of "organized fraud" occurs where a person "engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property." § 817.034(4)(a). Where the value of the property is over twenty thousand dollars but less than fifty thousand dollars, organized fraud is a second degree felony. § 817.034(4)(a)2....

...State, 482 So.2d 367 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) is directly on point here. Appellants' reliance on Donovan v. State, 572 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), and Cherry v. State, 592 So.2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), is misplaced, as both Donovan and Cherry concern section 817.034, Fla....

...In August, 1997, he obtained $500.00 from Hope Smith; (7) From August, 1997, to October, 1997, he obtained $41,100.00 from Elett Baily; and (8) In October, 1997, he obtained $1,300.00 from Clover Whyte. The State charged appellant with violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1997), the Florida Communications Fraud Act (FCFA)....

...775.083, or s. 775.084. 2. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of $20,000 or more, but less than $50,000, the violator is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. § 817.034, Fla....

...See United States v. Jaynes, 75 F.3d 1493 (10th Cir. 1996). The record shows that the last four charges in the information were filed within the statutory period and are sufficient to support a conviction for organized scheme to defraud, as provided in section 817.034(4)(a)2, Florida Statutes....

...ts brief nor in the trial court. See Maguire v. State, 453 So.2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). *1240 Accordingly, we reverse the order denying appellant's motion to dismiss, and we reverse his conviction and sentence for first degree organized fraud under section 817.034(4)(a)1, Florida Statutes....

...SORONDO, Judge. The state appeals an order dismissing charges of organized fraud, contracting without a license and grand theft against defendant, Dirk Summerlot. We reverse. The state charged Summerlot by information with: 1) organized fraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1991), and 2) contracting without a license in violation of section 489.127(1)(a) and (f), Florida Statutes (1991)....

...In July of 1996, the trial court held a hearing on the motion and ruled that it would dismiss the contracting without a license count, finding that Summerlot was "certified" as provided by section 489.127. [1] Later that month, the state filed an amended information charging Summerlot with: 1) organized fraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, and 2) grand theft first degree in violation of section 812.014(1), (2)(a), Florida Statutes (1991)....

...that he had misrepresented the costs associated with the contract. The trial court conducted a hearing on the sworn motion to dismiss less than a week after it was filed. The state acknowledged that Summerlot did not "communicate" as *591 defined in section 817.034(3)(a) in his scheme to defraud the McGuires, but argued that this element was not required to prove a charge under section 817.034(4)(a)1....

...The trial court found that the state could not prove that Summerlot contracted without a license, as he was a certified contractor as defined by section 489.105(8), Florida Statutes (1991). With respect to the organized fraud count, the court found: In light of the title of section 817.034 and the legislative intent embodied in section 817.031(1) of the statute, the State must prove that the defendant did "communicate" as part of a scheme to defraud, and that the victims' property was obtained by means of said scheme. This is so regardless of the fact that the defendant is charged under section 817.034(4)(a) and not under section 817.034(4)(b)....

...rove that he contracted without a license and the other misrepresentations asserted were not material and did not rise to a criminal level. The state contends that the trial court erred in granting the motion to dismiss the organized fraud charge as section 817.034(4)(a) does not require proof of any communication. We agree. Section 817.034(4) provides: (a) Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud ... (b) Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and, in furtherance of that scheme, communicates with any person with intent to obtain property from that person is guilty, for each such act of communication, of communications fraud.... § 817.034(4). The trial court read subsection (4)(a) in conjunction with subsection (1) of 817.034 which reads as follows: (1) LEGISLATIVE INTENT.— (a) The Legislature recognizes that schemes to defraud have proliferated in the United States in recent years and that many operators of schemes to defraud use communications technology to sol...

...ing the legal precedent available under federal mail and wire fraud statutes. The trial court ruled that the state must prove that the defendant did "communicate" as a part of a scheme to defraud, regardless of whether the defendant is charged under 817.034(4)(a) or 817.034(4)(b). The legislative intent set forth in 817.034(1) reflects the aim of preventing the use of communications technology in the perpetration of fraud. However, this provision also reflects that the enactment of section 817.034 consolidated former statutes concerning schemes to defraud (sections 817.035 and 817.036), neither of which required "communication." [2] Section 817.034(4)(c) provides that separate judgments and sentences may be imposed for offenses under subsections (4)(a) and (4)(b), which further suggests the legislative intent *592 that these subsections proscribe separate conduct....

...State, 50 So.2d 179, 184 (Fla.1951)) (emphasis omitted). Considering the legislative intent of subsection (1) together with the plain language of subsection (4), we hold that the state is not required to prove that a defendant "communicated" as a part of a scheme to defraud charged pursuant to section 817.034(4)(a)....

...State, 603 So.2d 64, 65 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). In the present case, Holcomb was not prejudiced. The offense of scheming to defraud was a crime of a continuing nature. Cf. Young v. Moore, 820 So.2d 901, 902 (Fla.2002) (holding a scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1, Florida Statutes (1995), was a true continuing offense for the purposes of gaintime calculations)....

...this single offense. We affirm the trial court's determination that Holcomb was not prejudiced by the amendment to the information. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence must be affirmed. Affirmed. ALTENBERND, C.J., and KELLY, J., Concur. NOTES [1] Section 817.034(4)(a)(1), Fla....

...• The Pattern of Racketeering Activity (Predicate Acts) By way of setting forth the “pattern of racketeering activity,” the Information contained 840 individual predicate acts comprised of: an organized scheme to de *135 fraud (in violation of section 817.034, Florida Statutes (2003)) and grand theft (in violation of section 812.014, Florida Statutes (2003))....

...Here, by contrast, Appellant was convicted of a crime for which the floor is $50,000, but for which there is no ceiling. Therefore, Starr Tyme in fact supports the lower court's judgment because the restitution amount was within the monetary parameters of the crime. [3] AFFIRMED. PLEUS, C.J. and MONACO, J., concur. NOTES [1] § 817.034(4)(a)1., Fla....

...That decision actually supports reversal here. The Rosen case involved a prosecution under the Florida Communications Fraud Act (FCFA). The statute prohibits the use of communications technology in furtherance of schemes to defraud. 757 So.2d at 1238 (quoting § 817.034, Fla....

...in light of subsections (1)(a) and (2) of the statute which independently criminalize conduct designed to defraud insurance companies, but also in light of other sections in chapter 817 which independently criminalize general schemes to defraud. See § 817.034(4), Fla....

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge. The appellant appeals from a twelve year sentence for organized fraud under Section 817.034(4)(a)(l), Fla....

...ugh organized fraud contains an element that is not an element of grand theft, “all of the elements of grand theft are included in the offense of organized fraud.” Id. at 1207 . Here, communications fraud is a sub-species of organized fraud. See § 817.034, Fla. Stat. As in Pizzo , all the elements of grand theft are included in the elements of communication fraud. Compare § 812.014, Fla. Stat. (grand theft), with § 817.034(4)(b), Fla....

...nsmit or transfer or to cause another to transmit or transfer signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligences of any nature in whole or in part by mail, or by wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo optical system.” § 817.034(3)(a), Fla....

...Brasner pled guilty to Count 13, which charged a violation of Fla. Stat. § 817.234 (l)(a)3. It alleged that Brasner had defrauded AXA by providing materially false information in insurance applications. He also pled guilty to Count 21, which charged a violation of Fla, Stat. § 817.034(4)(a)....

...quittal. We agree, reverse, and remand for entry of judgment and for resentencing on the lesser included offense of grand theft of property valued over $300 but less than $5,000. Cooks was charged with engaging in a scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a), Florida Statutes....

...nts of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, sufficient evidence exists to sustain a conviction. Id. The Florida Supreme Court has described the elements of the offense of committing a scheme to defraud, also known as "organized fraud," proscribed by section 817.034(4)(a), as follows: (1) Engaging in or furthering a systematic, ongoing course of conduct (2) with (a) intent to defraud, or (b) intent to obtain property by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or willful misre...

...ty or a benefit therefrom, or to appropriate the property to one's own use or to the use of any person not entitled thereto. Pizzo , 945 So.2d at 1207 (quoting Donovan , 572 So.2d at 526 ). As demonstrated by the case law, a conviction for violating section 817.034(4)(a) requires proof of more than mere theft....

...er person not entitled to its use); and with one count of engaging in a scheme to defraud and organized fraud upon Wal-Mart by issuing fraudulent returns or refunds and obtaining property thereby between February 13 and May 17, 2003, in violation of section 817.034(4), Florida Statutes (2003) (defining organized fraud or "scheme to defraud" as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false o...

...ions, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act") (Count Four). A jury found Appellant guilty in all four counts, as charged. The charged crimes of which Appellant was convicted are all third-degree felonies. See §§ 812.014(2)(c) & 817.034(4)(a)3., Fla....

...On April 5, 2005, following a bench trial, Varnum was acquitted of both charges. Thirteen months later, on May 17, 2006, the State filed the present information, charging Varnum with one umbrella count of organized fraud under the Florida Communications Fraud Act, section 817.034(3)(d), Florida Statutes (2004), and twenty-nine counts of grand theft concerning twenty-nine separate victims....

...ble jeopardy snare. Grady, 110 S.Ct. at 2095. Conviction REVERSED; sentence VACATED; cause REMANDED with direction that appellant be discharged as to the offense of organized fraud. COBB and W. SHARP, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] U.S. Const. amend. V. [2] § 817.034(4)(a)2, Fla....

...Gardner's investigation, the State charged Mr. Darwish with committing three felonies: initiating the theft of property and trafficking in that property, section 812.019(2), a first-degree felony (count one); scheming to defraud and obtaining property thereby, section 817.034(4)(a)(3), a third-degree felony (count two); and cheating by false pretenses, section 817.29, a third-degree felony (count three)....

...aud. Because appellant had relied on the prior instruction in his argument to the jury, we conclude that the error requires reversal. Appellant and his co-defendant were charged by amended information with committing organized fraud, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (2001)....

...ble for damages, but we reverse the amount of damages awarded and remand for further proceedings. In March 2002, Peterson was criminally charged with one count of scheming to defraud and obtaining property in an amount of $50,000 or more pursuant to section 817.034(4)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (2002)....

...Starr Tyme, 659 So.2d at 1068-69; Stafford, 920 So.2d at 793; J & P Transp., Inc. v. Fid. & Cas. Co. of N.Y., 750 So.2d 752, 753 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Paterno v. Fernandez, 569 So.2d 1349, 1350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). In the criminal action at issue here, Peterson was charged with scheming to defraud under section 817.034(4)(a)(1)....

...That statute defines a "scheme to defraud" as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act." § 817.034(3)(d). The section under which Peterson was convicted applies to any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and who actually obtains property as a result of the scheme in an aggregate amount of $50,000 or more. § 817.034(4)(a)(1)....

...(3) resulting in temporarily or permanently depriving any person of the right to property or a benefit therefrom, or appropriating the property to one's own use or to the use of another person not entitled thereto. Donovan, 572 So.2d at 526 (citing § 817.034(4)(a), Fla....

...is approach when Jackson admits alternative criminal avenues are available to prosecute him. See, e.g., § 812.014, Fla. Stat. (1989) ("Theft"); § 817.11, Fla. Stat. (1989) ("Obtaining property by fraudulent promise to furnish inside information"); § 817.034, Fla....

...The trial court withheld adjudication as to the felony count, but sentenced appellant to ten months jail time, followed by probation for three years. Appellant was adjudicated guilty on the remaining misdemeanor counts, and was placed on probation for ninety days in connection with these petit theft offenses. Section 817.034, the "Florida Communications Fraud Act," defines "scheme to defraud" as "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act." § 817.034(3)(d), Fla....

...Plaintiffs allege the following predicate acts with regard to Count I: organized fraud, communications fraud, theft, false official statements, compounding felony, commercial bribery and extortion. Defendant attacks each of these allegations. 1. Organized/Communications Fraud Plaintiffs allege violations of Fla. Stat. § 817.034(4)(a) and (b)....

RAY, J. The State charged inmate Michael W. Joseph III with an organized scheme to defraud the United States Government of $50,000 or more, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)l., Florida Statutes (2008)....

...he board voluntarily consented to the search and seizure, we reverse the trial court's suppression order and remand for further proceedings. REVERSED and REMANDED. HARRIS, C.J., and GOSHORN, J., concur. NOTES [1] See Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(c)(1)(B). [2] § 817.034(4)(a)(3), Fla....

...Before RAMIREZ and ROTHENBERG, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM. The State appeals from alternative orders respectively granting the defendant a judgment of acquittal and a new trial after a jury found him guilty of committing a scheme to defraud in the sale of East Everglades property. See § 817.034(3)(d), Fla. Stat. [1] ; § 817.034(4)(a)(1), Fla....

...we do not require resentencing on remand. We also affirm his convictions and sentences of probation for communication fraud. Affirmed in part and reversed in part. SILBERMAN and KELLY, JJ., concur. . See § 812.014(2)(c)(l), Fla. Stat. (1999). . See § 817.034(4)(b)(l), Fla. Stat. (1999). .See § 817.034(4)(a)(3), Fla....

...recedent. “Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and in furtherance of that scheme, communicates with any person with the intent to obtain property from that person is guilty, for each such act of communication, of communications fraud.” § 817.034(4)(b), Fla....

...logy in furtherance of schemes to defraud by consolidating former statutes concerning schemes to defraud and organized fraud to permit prosecution of these crimes utilizing the legal precedent available under federal mail and wire fraud statutes.” § 817.034(l)(b), Fla....

...appears to be enough to establish the communication for communications fraud. Under Pereira , even the customers actually mailing or wiring the payment in return for the machines would satisfy the communication required for communications fraud. See § 817.034(3)(d), Fla....

his guilty plea to a charge that he violated section 817.034, Florida Statutes (1995), by participating

...mitted range. AFFIRMED; Sentences VACATED; REMANDED. DAUKSCH and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur. COWART, J., dissents with opinion. . § 895.03(3), one count of engaging in racketeering activity; § 895.03(4), one count of conspiracy to commit racketeering; § 817.034(4), two counts of organized fraud; § 517.07, thirty counts of selling unregistered securities; § 517.-301, twenty counts of securities fraud; § 895.-03(1), two counts of receiving proceeds derived from racketeering activity....

“communications fraud.” § 817.034, Fla.Stat. (1987). Pursuant to section 817.034(4)(a), “[a]ny person who

...jury necessarily found Carr engaged in a course of conduct with the “(a) intent to defraud, or (b) intent to obtain property by false or fraudulent pretenses.” See Pizzo v. State, 945 So. 2d 1203, 1207 (Fla. 2006) (enumerating elements necessary to prove violation of § 817.034(4)(a))....

...ructure in the group for the making of decisions on an ongoing rather than an ad hoc basis. In our view, the instant case is indistinguishable from Console . AFFIRMED. HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur. . §§ 895.02(4); 817.234(l)(a), Fla. Stat. ' . § 817.034(4)(a)(3), Fla....

more), a first degree felony, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1,; and Counts 3-6: uttering a worthless

...The postconviction court relied on Mr. Turner’s judgment and sentence, which listed organized fraud as a second-degree felony, to deny this claim. However, the information filed in case number 95-183 alleges in the body of count one that Mr. Turner violated section 817.034(4)(a)(3) by obtaining property from the victim valued at less than $20,000, which is a third-degree felony....

...a Statutes (Count 3); one count of false or fraudulent insurance claims/$100,000 or more pursuant to section 817.234(1), Florida Statutes (Count 4); and one count of organized fraud/scheme to defraud/$50,000 or more pursuant to section 817.034(4)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (Count 5). In May 2015, Mr....

...ded back to the lower court. If he fails to do so, the court shall grant his motion to withdraw his plea and vacate the sentence and judgment appealed in this cause. REMANDED with directions. COBB, J., and SANDERS, E.P.B., Associate Judge, concur. . § 817.034(4)(a)3, Florida Statutes (1991)....

...support the trial court’s finding that she had the ability to pay restitution and willfully refused to do so. We agree and reverse. On February 10, 2009, the State charged Brooks with one count of organized fraud of $50,000 or more in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)(l), Florida Statutes....

...Therefore, because the extension of probation was erroneous, any additional costs associated with the extension of probation was also erroneously imposed. Reversed and Remanded. HAZOURI and CIKLIN, JJ., concur. . Communication fraud is a third degree felony. See § 817.034(4)(b)l, Fla....

violation of the Florida Communications Fraud Act, section 817.034, Florida Statutes, and a first degree misdemeanor

...provides: (4) It is unlawful for any person to conspire or endeavor to violate any of the provisions of ... subsection (3). § 895.03(4), Fla. Stat. (2003). [An] organized scheme to defraud charge . . . involves section 817.034(4)(a) 1., Florida Statutes (2003), which provides that “[a]ny person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud,” punishable as a first degree felony if the...

...raud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act.” § 817.034(3)(d), Fla....

...making defamatory and threatening posts on the daughter’s blog in violation of sections 836.05, 836.10, 895.02 of the Florida Statutes; b. making false entries in the books of a corporation (KEL) in violation of sections 817.034, 817.15, and 895.02(2) of the Florida Statutes; c....

...2d DCA 1993). Accordingly, on remand, the trial court may sentence defendant to a term of up to 4.5 years’ imprisonment on this conviction. AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part; REMANDED for resentencing. GRIFFIN, C.J., and DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur. . § 817.034(4), Fla....

...4th DCA 2009) (“[W]e think it equally apparent that each transaction was undertaken by her to appropriate the proceeds from the account for her own use even though she was not entitled to do so. The evidence thus constitutes a prima facie case of violating § 817.034(3).”). 2 

...resentenced using a corrected scoresheet which does not take into account the grand theft offenses vacated by the trial court. Reversed and remanded for resentencing with directions. DANAHY, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and LAZZARA, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] § 817.034(4)(a)1., Fla....

...tection of qualified immunity. But even if the omitted information had been included in the affidavits, there would still have been probable cause to believe each of the Appellees had engaged in a scheme to defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)....

...The 4  Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 5 of 29 affidavit urged that there was probable cause to charge Paez with one count of an Organized Scheme to Defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)(a)(3) and one count of Grand Theft in violation of Florida Statute § 812.014(2)(c). The Peters affidavit, also signed by Loyal and Mulvey, found that Peters engaged in 199.5 hours of unrecorded off-duty work, which would have required him to pay $997.50 in administrative fees to the Town....

...during hours he was listed as having worked for the GBPD, resulting in $1,380.12 of apparent “double compensation” from the Department. The affidavit said there was probable cause to charge Peters with one count of an Organized Scheme to Defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)(a)(3), eleven counts of Official Misconduct in violation of Florida Statute § 838.022, one count of Grand Theft in violation of Florida Statute § 812.014, and one count of False and Fraudulent Insurance Claims in violation of Florida Statute § 817.234....

...having worked for the GBPD, resulting in $312.00 of apparent “double compensation” from the Department. The affidavit claimed that there was probable cause to charge Diaz with one count of an Organized Scheme to Defraud in violation of Florida Statute § 817.034(4)(a)(3), two counts of Official Misconduct in violation of Florida Statute § 838.022, and one count of Grand Theft in violation of Florida Statute § 812.014(2)(c). B. After the...

...Our only question, 17  Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 18 of 29 then, is whether the affidavits still would have established probable cause to believe the officers had violated Florida Statute § 817.034(4), if they had included the omitted information that they knew about....

... Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 20 of 29 asserted probable cause to charge each of the three law enforcement officers with engaging in an organized scheme to defraud in violation of the Florida Communications Fraud Act, Florida Statute § 817.034. The relevant provision of Florida’s penal code makes it a crime to “engage[] in a scheme to defraud and obtain[] property thereby.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(4)(a). “Property” is defined as “anything of value.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(3)(c)....

...A “scheme to defraud” is “a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(3)(d)....

...Having repeatedly and deceptively failed to report off-duty work hours and having thereby deprived the Town of fees to which it was rightfully entitled, the Appellees appeared to have engaged in a “systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud.” Fla. Stat. § 817.034(3). Probable cause, then, comes down to this: since Paez, Peters, and Diaz repeatedly 20  Case: 16-16863 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 21 of 29 withheld relevant informat...

...Unfortunately, the circuit court's order contains no attachments to support its reasons for denying this claim. Thus, we reverse the circuit-court's ruling on this ground and remand for further proceedings. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. KELLY and LaROSE, JJ., Concur. NOTES [1] § 817.034(4)(a)(1), Fla....

WARNER, J. Appellant, Kathy Dent, appeals her conviction for engaging in an organized scheme to defraud, in violation of section 817.034(4), Florida Statutes....

...Dent claims that the state failed to prove that she obtained “property” within the meaning of the statute when all the state proved was the inability of other deputies to sign up for the opportunity to *207 obtain overtime. In other words, her conduct did not amount to a crime. We agree and reverse. Section 817.034 is titled the “Florida Communications Fraud Act.” The Legislature specifically provided its intent in adopting this criminal statute: (1) Legislative intent.— (a) The Legislature recognizes that schemes to defraud have prolifera...

...ut that does not make the condition property. 29 F.3d at 114-15 . The loss of an opportunity interest did not constitute “property” within the meaning of the wire and mail fraud statutes, whose interpretations are to govern the interpretation of section 817.034....

...While Dent’s manipulation of the signup system for overtime duty may have violated the policies of the department, and may be grounds for discipline or termination, she did not obtain “property” within the meaning of the statute. Therefore, no violation of section 817.034 occurred....

...Because that sentence does not violate principles of double jeopardy and is not otherwise illegal, we affirm it. The Restitution Order — Case No. 2D04-5383 After Ms. Peterson entered a no contest plea, she was sentenced on a charge of scheming to defraud and obtaining property in an amount of $50,000 or more in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (1994), a first-degree felony....

...Armas with twenty-five felonies of varying degrees, all according to Florida Statutes (2003): • Criminal use of personal identification information (one count) — $50,000 or more, section 817.568(2)(c), a first-degree felony. • Scheme to defraud (one count) — aggregate value of $50,000 or more, section 817.034(4)(a)(1), a first-degree felony....

...(4)(a) Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud, punishable as follows: 1. If the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of $50,000 or more, the violator is guilty of a felony of the first degree. . . . § 817.034(3)(e)(3)—(4)(a)(1), Fla....

...chargeable under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 and 18 U.S.C. § 1343. See § 895.02(1)(a)32, (b), Fla. Stat. (2003). - 10 - § 895.03(4), Fla. Stat. (2003). The organized scheme to defraud charge in Count III involves section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (2003), which provides that “[a]ny person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud,” punishable as a first degree felony if the amount of property obtai...

...course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act.” § 817.034(3)(d), Fla....

...ent) does.” Steffen, 687 F.3d at 1114 (quoting United States v. Colton, 231 F.3d 890, 898-99 (4th Cir. 2000)). The broad construction accorded to mail and wire fraud is equally applicable to the state crime of organized scheme to defraud under section 817.034. The express legislative intent behind that section is to combat schemes to defraud and to permit prosecution by “utilizing the legal precedent available under federal mail and wire fraud statutes.” § 817.034(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003). The term “scheme to defraud” used in section 817.034 is plucked from federal mail and wire fraud cases. Here, the State’s theory of the case demonstrated that the criminal enterprise sold illegally obtained prescription drugs with the intent to defraud consumers by, in some instan...

...racketeering activity.” Reyan, 145 So. 3d at 139; see also Mese, 824 So. 2d at 913; Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52, 63-66 (1997). A defendant’s agreement may be inferred from his conduct. United States v. Hughes, 895 F.2d 1135, 1141 (6th Cir. 1990). To prove conspiracy under section 817.034(4)(a)1., the State may show that the defendant knew the overall objectives of the enterprise and intended to participate in it or agreed to further its purpose....

...Batten has raised and we have considered each of the seven issues in *961 the attack upon his convictions. 1 We affirm. Our research has revealed only one opinion from a Florida appellate court touching upon the Florida Communications Fraud Act (Act), § 817.034, Fla.Stat....

...ning a double jeopardy contention. The resolution of Donovan did not require the degree of inquiry into the Act we undertake in this opinion. Thus, we write in an attempt to elucidate the purpose of the Act, and the manner in which it is to operate. Section 817.034(l)(b), Florida Statutes, describes the legislature’s intent in enacting the Act and prescribes a source of authority for its implementation: ......

...schemes to defraud and organized fraud to permit prosecution of these crimes utilizing the legal precedent available under federal mail and wire fraud statutes. A “scheme to defraud” as that phrase is used in the foregoing section is defined in section 817.034(3)(d) as: ......

...h intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons, by false or fraudulent pretenses, [or] representations” pursuant to which he “obtained property valued at less than $20,000, contrary to Chapter 817.034(1)(3).” Counts II and III allege that Batten “did engage in a scheme to defraud, and in furtherance of that scheme did communicate with James D. Keyse and Frank D’Ambrosio with intent to obtain property ... [from each of them] in the amount of $300 or more, contrary to Chapter 817.034(4)(b)(l).” The evidence developed in support of the information’s allegations disclosed that James Keyse purchased a 1979 Chrysler from Batten in June, 1988....

...Stork’s Nest, Inc., 477 So.2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). The conclusion we have reached in this regard flows from the legislature’s grant to the judiciary of the freedom to utilize “legal precedent available under federal mail and wire fraud statutes.” § 817.034(l)(b)....

...In short, Batten’s scheme, unlike those found in McNally and Italiano , was not in any fashion integrated with a public function conferring an “intangible right” upon the people of Florida. 2 Affirmed. DANAHY, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J„ concur. . We expressly find, contrary to Batten’s contention, that section 817.034, et seq., does not violate the directive contained in Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Florida that ‘‘[e]very law shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, and the subject shall be briefly expressed in the title." ....

...1988, through the enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 1346 : For the purposes of this chapter [18 USCS §§ 1341, et seq.] the term "scheme or artifice to defraud” includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services. Section 817.034(3)(c)(2) and (3) contain a like reference....

DAMOORGIAN, C.J. Darrin McCray (“McCray”), a former Lieutenant with the Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office (“the Sheriff’), appeals his convictions for organized scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)(3), Florida Statutes (2006), and nine counts of official misconduct in violation of section 838.022, Florida Statutes (2006)....

...Based on these facts, the State charged McCray and five others with organized scheme to defraud. This Court reviewed the conviction of one of McCray’s co-defendants on the same charge and determined that the alleged pattern of conduct did not constitute a criminal violation under section 817.034(4)(a)(3)....

...Likewise, McCray’s conduct does not support a conviction for organized scheme to defraud. Accordingly, we remand for resentenc-ing on the convictions for official misconduct. Affirmed in part; Reversed in part and Remanded. CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur. . Section 817.034(4)(a)(3) provides: Any person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud, punishable as follows ... [i]f the amount of property obtained has an aggregate value of less than $20,000, the violator is guilty of a felony of the third degree.... Section 817.034(3)(c) defines property as "anydiing of value, and includes: 1....

...Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before SCALES, MILLER and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.  Affirmed. See § 817.034(4)(a), Fla....

(1) organized fraud, in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (2022);

...Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Daniel P. Hyndman, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee. GROSS, J. Ricky Weaver appeals his conviction after a jury trial of a scheme to defraud less than $20,000 in violation of section 817.034(4)(a)3, Florida Statutes (2007)....

...However, Weaver's operation of a business does not insulate him from criminal charges; the state's evidence demonstrated that Weaver's "business practices cross[ed] the line that convert[ed] them from legal to illegal activities." Kipping v. State, 702 So.2d 578, 581 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Section 817.034(4)(a)3 provides that "[a]ny person who engages in a scheme to defraud and obtains property thereby is guilty of organized fraud . . ." Section 817.034(3)(c)2 defines "property" as "anything of value," including "rights, privileges, interests, and claims." Under section 817.034(3)(d), "scheme to defraud" means "a systematic, ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud one or more persons, or with intent to obtain property from one or more persons by false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises or willful misrepresentations of a future act....

...hat he would perform his side of the contract within a specific time. The evidence supports the view that when he made these promises, he had no intention of performing them, so that he "willful[ly] misrepresented a future act" within the meaning of section 817.034(3)(d)....

...Altman was charged with aggravated stalking in violation of section 784.048 (case no. 2018-CF-100-AK); grand theft in violation of sections 812.014(1) and 812.014(2)(c) (case no. 2018-CF-443-AK); organized scheme to defraud in violation of section 817.034, and four counts of cashing or depositing item with intent to defraud in violation of section 832.05(3) (case no....