WALTER NORFOLK WEBB, III, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Webb appealed his 15-year robbery sentence, challenging the trial court's stated rationale for imposing the maximum penalty. The appellate court vacated the sentence because the judge improperly relied on the burden and inconvenience of trial (bringing witnesses from out of state and being forced to trial) as sentencing factors, though it upheld the judge's consideration of Webb's prior felony conviction and credibility issues.
The trial court erred in relying on the inconvenience of trial and the burden of bringing witnesses from out of state as justifications for enhancing the sentence. While the court properly considered Webb's prior felony conviction and his credibility as a witness, the sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing without reliance on these invalid factors.
[1] A trial court may not impose an enhanced sentence based on the fact that the defendant exercised the right to a trial.
[2] A trial court may consider a defendant's prior undisclosed felony conviction when imposing a sentence.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The factors that "we" had to bring witnesses from California (the record indicates Pennsylvania) and that "we" were forced into trial position are not valid considerations for sentencing purposes.”
The core holding establishing that trial inconvenience and burden cannot justify sentence enhancement.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWebb was charged with robbery, which carries a maximum sentence of 15 years. Before trial, the court offered to sentence him to only 10 years if he pl…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prior Felony Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a sentence in a robbery case. The maximum sentence for the crime committed is 15 years. Before trial, the court agreed to sentence appellant to only 10 years if he would plead guilty. He refused to plead and after trial the court told him:
THE COURT: Sir, let me state for the record that the reason for the additional five years, number one, we had to bring two witnesses from California when we were forced into trial position; number two, I was not formerly aware of the Defendant’s prior felony conviction. It was established per the Florida Rules of evidence during the trial that he did admit to a prior felony conviction. The Court took that into consideration. That was a new factor and finally the Court agrees with the Jury’s evaluation of the Defendant’s testimony on the stand. Those are the reasons for the enhancement.
While we do not disagree with the judge taking into consideration the earlier undisclosed prior felony conviction and the fact that he felt appellant had lied on the witness stand, we do find fault with “number one” from the quote. The factors that “we” had to bring witnesses from California (the record indicates Pennsylvania) and that “we” were forced into trial position are not valid considerations for sentencing purposes. We vacate the sentence, remand the matter to the trial court for resentencing. See United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570, 88 S.Ct. 1209, 20 L.Ed.2d 138 (1968); R.A.B. v. State, 399 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Gillman v. State, 373 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); McEachern v. State, 388 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Sentence vacated and remanded.
COBB, C.J., and DAUKSCH and SHARP, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 679 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…d by another judge, to be assigned by the chief judge of the circuit. E.g., AS. v. State, 667 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Cavallaro v. State, 647 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Pasley v. State, 559 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Webb v. State, 454 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Gillman v. State, 373 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), reversed on other grounds, 390 So. 2d 62 (Fla.1980); Gallucci v. State, 371 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 383 So. 2d 1194 (Fla.1980). CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SEN…
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570 (U.S. 1968)
- Gillman v. State, 373 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- McEACHERN v. State, 388 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- R. A. B. v. State, 399 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)