Debaun v. State
Annotate this CaseDefendant was charged with violating Fla. Stat. 384.24(2), which was enacted to prevent the spread of sexually transmissible diseases. The charge arose from a homosexual relationship between Defendant and the victim. Defendant moved to dismiss the charge under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.190(c)(4), arguing that the term “sexual intercourse” applies only to penile-vaginal intercourse. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss based on the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in L.A.P. v. State, which held that the term “sexual intercourse” as used in the statute applies only to “the penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ.” The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the term “sexual intercourse” as used in section 384.24(2) encompasses conduct beyond penile-vaginal intercourse and includes oral and anal intercourse between two men. The Supreme Court approved of the Third District’s decision and disapproved the decision of the Second District in L.A.P., holding that the term “sexual intercourse” in section 384.24(2) encompasses conduct beyond penile-vaginal intercourse.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.