JAMES HARRIS, 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.
James Harris appeals his conviction for false imprisonment, burglary, and two counts of armed sexual battery on a 65-year-old victim, challenging the trial court's departure from Florida's sentencing guidelines. The appellate court affirms the departure sentence, finding clear and convincing reasons for the upward departure justified the aggravated sentence.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's departure from the sentencing guidelines, finding clear and convincing reasons supported the upward departure under Florida Sentencing Guidelines Rule 3.701.
[1] A court may depart from sentencing guidelines based on aggravating circumstances and actions of the defendant during the commission of the offenses, including excessive f…
[2] Great violence and great bodily harm inflicted upon a victim can be grounds for departing from sentencing guidelines, even if not explicitly charged as part of the origin…
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 Court may — and does — consider aggravating circumstances and actions of MR. HARRIS in the commission of the instant offenses.”
Establishes the trial court's authority to consider aggravating circumstances as the basis for sentencing departure.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarris was convicted of false imprisonment, burglary, and two counts of armed sexual battery against a frail 65-year-old victim. The crimes involved e…
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 Cruelty cases and more on FLexlaw
LETTS, Judge.
The defendant was convicted of false imprisonment, burglary, and two counts of armed sexual battery on a frail sixty-five-year-old victim. The defendant appeals the trial judge’s decision to depart from the guidelines and aggravate the sentence. We affirm.
As to the facts of this case, we content ourselves with a reproduction of the trial judge’s order which in our opinion, articulates in writing clear and convincing reasons for the departure.
ORDER
THIS COURT finds clear and convincing reasons to depart from the Sentencing Guidelines. Pursuant to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.701, the following reasons are enumerated, to depart from the Guidelines’ recommended sentence of seventeen (17) to twenty-two (22) years in the custody of the Department of Corrections:
1)The Court may — and does — consider aggravating circumstances and actions of MR. HARRIS in the commission of the instant offenses. Mischler v. State, 4 DCA, 9 FLW 2205 [458 So. 2d 37 (1984) ]. I specifically call attention to the excessive beating and use of force by MR. HARRIS in general; specifically, the beating that occurred after the burglary and rapes, outside the victim’s home, as the victim was making a desperate attempt to flee. See, also: Smith v. State, 2 DCA, 9 FLW 1842 [454 So. 2d 90 (1984) ]; Harrington v. State, 2 DCA, 9 FLW 1960 [455 So. 2d 1317 (1984) ].
2) The crimes for which MR. HARRIS was convicted involved great violence and great bodily harm. It should be noted that these factors are not part of the original charge, in that the State charged and proved sexual batteries while “armed”, and did not charge “great bodily harm”. MR. HARRIS’ actions disclosed a high degree of cruelty, viciousness and callousness to the victim, and for this reason also the Court departs from the Guidelines.
3) The victim in this case was particularly vulnerable due to her age and obvious frailty.
4) The strikingly similar crimes perpetrated in Corpus Christi, Texas indicates to this Court that MR. HARRIS acted out of premeditation, and possibly in need for Mentally Disordered Sex Offender treatment. See Sweat v. State, 1 DCA, 9 FLW 1825 [454 So. 2d 749 (1984)]; Dorman v. State, 1 DCA, 9 FLW 1854 [457 So. 2d 503 (1984)].
5) The Court does consider the mental trauma done to the victim of MR. HARRIS’ actions. While the score-sheet prepared does consider physical injuries, the Court may consider the psychological trauma done. See: Green v. State, 2 DCA, 9 FLW 1385 [455 So. 2d 586 (1984)]; Williams v. State, 5 DCA, 9 FLW 2221 [454 So. 2d 790 (1984)]; Davis v. State, 4 DCA 9 FLW 2221 [458 So. 2d 42 (1984) ]. The Court was in a position to observe the victim’s emotional state during her testimony, as well as testimony put on before this Court during sentencing. For all of the above reasons, this Court
hereby declares the Sentencing' Guidelines’ recommendation of seventeen (17) to twenty-two (22) years to be inade quate; for the protection of the people of the State of Florida, and because of the above reasons, this Court hereby exceeds the Guidelines and sentences MR. HARRIS accordingly.
DONE in open Court this 26th day of April, 1985.
/s/ Thomas M. Coker, Jr. THOMAS M. COKER, JR. JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT.
We find no merit in the remaining points on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
HERSEY, C.J., and DELL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Hansbrough v. State, 509 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 1987)…this victim, it is also valid because victim injury is not a component of armed robbery. Excessive force, reason two, has been upheld as a valid reason for departure. Jefferson v. State, 489 So. 2d 860 [*1088] (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Harris v. State, 482 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Sabb v. State, 479 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Excessive force, however, will, virtually always, result in victim injury. Upholding this reason in this case, therefore, would be duplicitous because we have upheld reason thre…
-
Johnson v. State, 509 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…v. State, 466 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 476 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 1985). A victim’s age may be a valid consideration in departing. See Ball v. State, 487 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 497 So. 2d 1217 (Fla.1986); Harris v. State, 482 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Hadley v. State, 488 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). However, in this case the victim was identified as a middle-aged store manager, and there was no evidence that her age was a relevant consideration. The manner of the defendan…
-
Jefferson v. State, 489 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), and Sabb v. State, 479 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), involved convictions of armed robbery, and victim injury is not necessarily a part of that charge to be included on the scoresheet. The third case, Harris v. State, 482 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA, 1986), involved a conviction of false imprisonment, burglary, and armed sexual battery; and although these crimes “involved great violence and great bodily harm,” these factors were “not part of the original charge, in that the State…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 454 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Davis v. State, 458 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Mischler v. State, 458 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Green v. State, 455 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Sweat v. State, 454 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Dorman v. State, 457 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- State v. Herlovich, 455 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Harrington v. State, 455 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Williams v. State, 454 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- Perry v. Sawyer, 454 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)