Soliciting a Prostitute Crimes in Orange County, FL
The police in Orange County, FL, conduct elaborate sting operations in order to arrest men for offering to commit, committing, or engaging in prostitution, lewdness, or assignation by sexual intercourse in violation of section 796.07(2)(e), Florida Statutes. The crime of soliciting a prosecute is charged as a first degree misdemeanor.
Similar prostitution sting operations are conducted by other agencies in the area including the Orlando Police Department. The prostitution sting operations are often set up to target male tourist in the area on vacation.
Attorney for Prostitution Crimes in Orange County, FL
If you were charged in Orange County with offering to commit, committing, or engaging in prostitution, lewdness, or assignation by sexual intercourse with a prostitute in violation of section 796.07(2)(e), Florida Statutes, contact an attorney at Sammis Law Firm.
We help men fight allegations of soliciting a prostitute. We understand how officers in these elaborate sting operations sometimes make false or exaggerated accusations in order to increase the number of men arrested.
We represent clients throughout all of the Orange County Municipalities inculding:
- Apopka
- Bay Lake
- Belle Isle
- Eatonville
- Edgewood
- Lake Buena Vista
- Maitland
- Oakland
- Ocoee
- Orlando
- Windermere
- Winter Garden
- Winter Park
We can also help you determine what defenses might exist in your case, including the entrapment defense.
Call 813-250-0500.
The Entrapment in Soliciting a Prostitute Case
A recent case was decided in the Sixth District Court of Appeal, State v. ______, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D387b (6th District, Case No. 6D2024-1593, L.T. Case No. 2024-MM-402536-A-O)(February 27, 2026). In that case, the appellate court reversed a trial court order granting a motion to dismiss a charge of soliciting a prostitute based on the defense of subjective entrapment.
In that case, the Orange County Sheriff’s Office conducted an elaborate “sting” operation on South Orange Blossom Trail that runs from Orlando to Kissimmee, FL. During the sting operation, an undercover officer was dressed as, and mimicked the actions of, a prostitute. First, the undercover officer would walk close to the busy street and then retreat towards a hotel located just off South Orange Blossom Trail.
During this encounter, the defendant pulled his car off the main road to enter the hotel’s parking lot where the person posing as a prostitute was standing. A conversation began. The undercover officer claimed:
- the defendant asked her if the police were bothering her;
- the undercover officer asked if he wanted to party;
- he had just gotten off work and needed to shower;
- she said he could use her shower in the hotel just behind them;
- the defendant agreed; and
- she quoted him a price that he agreed to pay, but he said he needed to get the money first.
The defendant denied agreeing to enter her room or shower. He also denied agreeing to the price or saying he needed to go get the money. In any event, when he drove away, he was arrested for offering to commit, committing, or engaging in prostitution, lewdness, or assignation by sexual intercourse with a prostitute in violation of section 796.07(2)(e), Florida Statutes.
The defendant filed a motion dismiss the charge of soliciting a prosecute, stating under oath in his motion that he “did not initiate any criminal activity nor did he initiate any communication with” the agent and prevailing on his defense that the government’s “sting” operation subjectively entrapped him.
The appellate court explained the defense of subjective entrapment codified in section 777.201, Florida Statutes. Under that statute, entrapment occurs when law enforcement employs methods of persuasion or inducement which create “a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.” § 777.201(1), Fla. Stat.
Section 777.201(1), Florida Statutes (2024), states in full: “A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement officer perpetrates an entrapment if, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of a crime, he or she induces or encourages and, as a direct result, causes another person to engage in conduct constituting such crime by employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.”
When determining whether entrapment has occurred, the court must consider the following two questions of fact:
- improper inducement by law enforcement; and
- the defendant’s lack of predisposition to commit the offense charged.
(citing Munoz v. State, 629 So. 2d 90, 99 (Fla. 1993)).
The court reasoned that under Section 777.201(2), the entrapment defense must be determined by the jury during a jury trial or the judge during a bench trial. The court is only allowed to dismiss the criminal charge before it reaches a jury if the undisputed facts establish both prongs. Munoz, 629 So. 2d at 95.
This article was last updated on Friday, February 27, 2026.
