Kaitlyn Hunt has accepted the new plea deal offered to her by the prosecution on Tuesday.
Hunt, 19, is facing two counts of lewd and lascivious battery and one count of transmission of material harmful to a minor.
But prosecutors had offered a deal in which she would have to agree to stay in jail until December and serve three years of felony supervision, including three months of probation and two years of community control, in exchange for changing her plea to "no contest."
Her attorney, Julie Graves, said Hunt has accepted the plea deal.
On Thursday, Hunt pleaded no contest before Indian River County Circuit Judge Robert Pegg, who accepted the plea and sentenced Kaitlyn to the conditions in the plea agreement. Part of that agreement is that she would need to remain incarcerated until December 20.
Hunt was arrested back in February on "lewd and lascivious battery of a child 12 to 16 years old" charges because of her same-sex relationship with a fellow student, who was 14 at the time.
Shehas received an overwhelming amount of support online since her arrest, particularly from those who believe this is a gay rights issue.
The Hunt family has maintained that Hunt's girlfriend's parents had pressed charges because they simply couldn't handle their daughter being in a same-sex relationship.
In August, prosecutors revoked a similar plea deal when she violated the terms of conditions. Investigators determined that Hunt had defied a pretrial court order when she sent thousands of text messages, including naked photos, to the girl she's accused of having sexual relations with when the victim was 14 years old.
The judge had ordered Hunt to cut off all communication with the victim. Prosecutors also alleged that Hunt's mother, Kelley Hunt Smith, also stayed in touch with the victim and told her to delete the texts from Kaitlyn so she wouldn't get in trouble.
In a statement from the victim and her family, attorney Charles Sullivan Jr. insisted that this case was about the age of the girl and not about sexual orientation.
"It was never the intent of the (victim's family) to harm the defendant and this case was never about gender or sexual orientation. It was about age-appropriate relationships and following the rules and laws of our society."