Twice-Convicted NC Sex Offender Pleads Guilty to Enticing 11-Year-Old in Florida
When Geoffrey Lee Dudding stepped into a federal courtroom in Jacksonville, Florida, on November 23, 2025, he didn’t deny what he’d done. The 39-year-old, a twice-convicted sex offender from Concord, North Carolina, pleaded guilty to attempting to lure an 11-year-old child into sexual activity — a crime that carries a mandatory minimum of 10 years behind bars. What makes this case chilling isn’t just the act, but the pattern: Dudding, already registered under North Carolina’s sex offender laws, used his phone and internet to groom a child across state lines, then drove from North Carolina to Florida to meet the victim — only to be arrested by federal agents before he ever laid eyes on the child.
How a Registered Offender Got Caught Again
Dudding’s downfall didn’t come from a random tip. It was a carefully orchestrated sting by the FBI’s Jacksonville Field Office and the Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force. Investigators posed as the child’s parent in an online chat room, allowing Dudding to believe he was communicating with a mother who’d consented to her 11-year-old daughter meeting him. Over weeks, he sent explicit messages, shared inappropriate photos, and even arranged a meeting at a Florida hotel. He showed up with cash and a change of clothes — evidence prosecutors later used to prove intent.It’s not his first time. Court records show Dudding was convicted in 2011 and 2017 for sexual offenses involving minors in North Carolina. Each time, he was required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). But registration doesn’t stop predators — it just makes them easier to track. And in this case, tracking led straight to federal charges under Title 18, United States Code, Section 2422(b), which criminalizes using interstate commerce to entice a minor for sexual activity.
Federal Jurisdiction and the Long Arm of the Law
Why federal court? Because Dudding crossed state lines. That’s the key. Even if the child was never real — and in this case, the victim was entirely fictional — the act of traveling across state lines to meet someone he believed to be a minor triggers federal jurisdiction. The same law was used to convict Evin Scott Young of Texas, who received 35 years in November 2025, and Charles William Maitski of St. Cloud, who got life in October 2025. Both were sentenced by the same judge: Marcia Morales Howard, who presides over the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.United States Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe didn’t mince words in the DOJ press release: “This isn’t a hypothetical threat. These predators don’t wait for opportunities — they create them.” The case was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida, which has become one of the most active federal districts in prosecuting child exploitation cases.
What Happens Now?
Dudding’s guilty plea means he’s waived his right to trial. But sentencing isn’t immediate. A U.S. Probation Office investigator is now compiling a presentence report — a 50- to 100-page document that digs into his criminal history, mental health evaluations, and even his internet browsing logs. Judge Howard will consider whether to impose the mandatory 10-year minimum or go higher. Given his prior convictions, and the fact he traveled to meet a child he believed to be 11, prosecutors are likely pushing for 15 to 20 years.He’ll also be required to register as a federal sex offender for life — not just in North Carolina, but nationwide. His name, photo, and address will be publicly listed in the National Sex Offender Public Website (NSOPW). And if he ever tries to move states again, he’ll have to notify authorities in both his old and new locations — a requirement that’s often ignored by repeat offenders.
Why This Case Matters Beyond One Man
This isn’t just about Dudding. It’s about how predators adapt. They don’t wait for victims to be vulnerable — they create the vulnerability. In the last two years, the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force has opened over 12,000 cases nationwide. Nearly 40% involve offenders who’ve been previously convicted. That’s not coincidence. It’s a systemic failure.North Carolina’s sex offender registry is one of the most comprehensive in the country. Yet Dudding still found ways to access children online. That’s because registries don’t monitor internet activity. They don’t block devices. They don’t stop someone from logging into a chat room. And until we start treating digital grooming as seriously as physical contact — not just as a crime, but as a public health crisis — more Duddings will keep showing up.
Meanwhile, the FBI and HSI continue to run sting operations every week. In October 2025 alone, the ICAC Task Force arrested 217 people across 34 states. Many were first-time offenders. But many, like Dudding, were repeat ones — men who thought they’d outsmarted the system. They didn’t.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does this case reflect broader trends in child exploitation?
This case mirrors a nationwide spike in online enticement crimes, especially among repeat offenders. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, over 30% of suspects arrested in 2025 had prior convictions for child exploitation. The use of encrypted apps and burner phones has made detection harder, but federal task forces like ICAC have improved digital tracking — resulting in a 22% increase in arrests since 2023.
Why was this prosecuted federally instead of in North Carolina?
Federal jurisdiction applies when a suspect uses interstate communication — like texting or emailing across state lines — or travels across state borders to meet a minor. Dudding initiated contact from North Carolina and traveled to Florida, triggering the Mann Act and federal child enticement statutes. State courts typically handle cases where the offender and victim are in the same state and no travel occurred.
Can a sex offender ever be removed from the registry?
In most states, including North Carolina, individuals convicted of certain sex offenses against minors are required to register for life. Even if they complete all court-ordered treatment, federal law under SORNA prohibits removal for Tier II and III offenders — which includes Dudding’s prior convictions. Some states allow petitions after 25 years for low-risk offenders, but those with multiple convictions rarely qualify.
What role did the FBI’s ICAC Task Force play in this case?
The ICAC Task Force, funded by the Department of Justice, operates in all 50 states and specializes in online child exploitation cases. In this instance, they monitored Dudding’s communications, preserved digital evidence, and coordinated with Homeland Security Investigations to execute the arrest. They also worked with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to ensure federal charges were properly filed — a process that took six weeks from initial contact to arrest.
What happens to children who are the targets of these stings?
In cases like Dudding’s, the "victim" is an undercover agent — meaning no child was ever endangered. But law enforcement still treats these cases as if a real child was at risk, because the predator’s intent and actions are identical. Agencies also use these cases to educate parents and schools about online safety, often releasing anonymized details to raise awareness without compromising investigations.
Are there any signs that Dudding might have had accomplices?
Investigators found no evidence of accomplices in Dudding’s communications or financial records. His phone logs show only one device used for the grooming — a Samsung Galaxy S21 purchased with cash in 2024. However, authorities are reviewing his social media contacts and online forums for possible links to other predators, as many repeat offenders operate within hidden online communities.
