## Facts

- Terry Lyons boarded a casino ship departing from Treasure Island, Florida, carrying a “cheating device.”
- After the ship passed beyond Florida’s territorial waters and gambling began, casino staff observed Lyons using the device on a $1 slot machine.
- In less than five minutes, Lyons obtained approximately $100 to $150 in tokens.
- The ship’s captain detained Lyons and turned him over to local police when the ship returned.
- Florida charged Lyons with grand theft of $300 or more.
- Lyons moved to dismiss for lack of Florida criminal jurisdiction, challenged the constitutionality of Florida Statutes § 910.006 (1993) (jurisdiction over vessels), and sought dismissal under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4) on the ground that the undisputed facts showed less than $300 was taken.
- The State filed a traverse disputing Lyons’s valuation/amount assertions and alleging facts supporting the grand-theft threshold.
- The trial court denied the motions; Lyons pleaded no contest while reserving the right to appeal the denials.

## Issues

1. Whether Florida had criminal jurisdiction to prosecute theft occurring on a vessel outside Florida’s territorial waters when an essential element of theft occurred within Florida.
2. Whether Florida Statutes § 910.006 (1993), governing state criminal jurisdiction over vessels, was constitutional as applied or on its face.
3. Whether dismissal under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4) was required where the defendant asserted the undisputed facts showed less than $300 was taken, but the State filed a traverse alleging a higher amount.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the conviction.
- Florida had jurisdiction under Florida Statutes § 910.005(2) because the offense was committed partly within Florida: Lyons formed the intent to steal in Florida by boarding with the cheating device, and intent is an element of theft.
- The court rejected the constitutional challenge to § 910.006 and noted jurisdiction was independently supported by § 910.005(2) regardless of § 910.006.
- The trial court properly denied the Rule 3.190(c)(4) motion because the State’s traverse created a material factual dispute over the value/amount taken, which could not be resolved on a pretrial motion to dismiss.

## Legal Principles

- A state may exercise criminal jurisdiction over an offense “committed partly” within the state when conduct that is an element of the offense occurs within the state.  
- For theft offenses, formation of intent within the state can supply the in-state element necessary for jurisdiction even if the taking occurs outside territorial waters.
- A Rule 3.190(c)(4) motion must be denied when the State’s traverse specifically disputes material facts and alleges facts that, if proved, establish the charged offense.
- Florida’s statutory assertion of criminal jurisdiction connected to vessels departing from Florida ports is constitutionally permissible, and does not displace other bases for jurisdiction under Florida law.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Florida’s prosecution of theft on an offshore casino vessel because Lyons’s intent to steal was formed in Florida, satisfying the “partly within the state” jurisdiction statute, and it upheld denial of pretrial dismissal because the State’s traverse raised factual disputes about whether the grand-theft amount was met.


Lyons v. State, 711 So. 2d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1998)