An appeals court has breathed new life into a prostitution case against an Orange County man, ruling that a lower court judge jumped the gun by dismissing the charges based on a defense of entrapment.
In an opinion released February 27, 2026, the Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed a decision by County Court Judge Martha C. Adams that had previously cleared Keith John Gadbois. The legal battle stems from a “sting” operation conducted by the Orange County Sheriff’s Office on South Orange Blossom Trail—a stretch of road the state identified as a known hub for prostitution.
The incident began when an undercover agent, dressed and acting as a prostitute, was standing in a hotel parking lot. According to court records, Gadbois pulled his car off the main road and entered the lot, leading to a conversation between him and the agent.
The two sides, however, offered vastly different accounts of that talk. The agent testified that Gadbois asked if the police were bothering her, leading her to ask if he “wanted to party.”
She claimed Gadbois agreed to a price but said he needed to get cash first. Gadbois, meanwhile, filed a sworn motion stating he never initiated any criminal activity or communication. He argued the agent approached his car “uninvited and unprompted” while he was simply driving home from work.
READ: Florida Law Enforcement Hits The Jackpot In Massive Four-County Casino Bust
“The trial court determined that dismissal was appropriate based on Gadbois’s defense of subjective entrapment,” wrote Judge Nardella in the appellate opinion. “As explained below, this was error, and we reverse.”
Under Florida law, entrapment occurs when police use methods of persuasion that create a “substantial risk” that a crime will be committed by someone who wasn’t already predisposed to do it. While judges can sometimes dismiss cases early if the facts are undisputed, the appellate court ruled that this case is far too “he-said, she-said” for a pre-trial dismissal.
The court noted that simply creating an opportunity for a crime—like an undercover officer standing on a street corner—is not the same thing as “inducement.”
“Inducement entails some semblance of ‘arm-twisting,’ pleading, or coercive tactics,” the court noted, citing previous case law. “Accepting the undercover agent’s account of their interaction… a jury could conclude that the government merely created the opportunity.”
Because the facts of the encounter are still in dispute, the court ruled the issue must be decided by a jury rather than a judge.
The case has been sent back to the lower court for further proceedings. Gadbois currently faces charges of offering to commit or engaging in prostitution.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
