STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, CROSS-RESPONDENT,
v.
TERENCE A. BAKER, RESPONDENT, CROSS-PETITIONER
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.
The Florida Supreme Court reviewed whether a sentencing court's consideration of impermissible reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines requires remand for resentencing, and whether shooting a uniformed police officer constitutes a valid reason for upward departure. The Court held that remand is required when impermissible reasons cannot be clearly separated from the departure decision, and that a police officer victim status is a valid departure reason.
The appellate court must remand for resentencing when it cannot determine beyond a reasonable doubt that impermissible reasons did not affect the departure sentence. The fact that the victim was a uniformed police officer is a valid reason for upward departure from sentencing guidelines.
[1] When an appellate court finds that a sentencing court relied upon an impermissible reason for departing from sentencing guidelines, the case must be remanded for resenten…
[2] The fact that a victim is a uniformed police officer is a valid reason for departing from sentencing guidelines.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 district court here was unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the impermissible reasons [for departure] did not affect the departure sentence.”
Establishes the standard for remand when impermissible sentencing factors are considered - if the appellate court cannot clearly separate impermissible from permissible reasons, remand is required.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBaker pleaded guilty to seven charges arising from a paint store burglary. During arrest, Baker struggled with a police officer, obtained the officer'…
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 Remand For Resentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
EHRLICH, Justice.
This case is before us for review of the same question certified in, inter alia, Young v. State, 455 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984):
WHEN AN APPELLATE COURT FINDS THAT A SENTENCING COURT RELIED UPON A REASON OR REASONS THAT ARE IMPERMISSIBLE UNDER FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.701 IN MAKING ITS DECISION TO DEPART FROM THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES, SHOULD THE APPELLATE COURT EXAMINE THE OTHER REASONS GIVEN BY THE SENTENCING COURT TO DETERMINE IF THOSE REASONS JUSTIFY A DEPARTURE FROM THE GUIDELINES OR SHOULD THE CASE BE REMANDED FOR A RESENTENC-ING?
Baker v. State, 466 So. 2d 1144, 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. The district court below disallowed four of five reasons for upward departure from the sentence recommended under the sentencing guidelines on a plea of guilty by Baker to seven charges arising from a paint store burglary. Baker struggled with a police officer attempting to arrest him and shot, but did not kill, the officer with the officer’s weapon. The one reason for departure found valid by the district court was the fact that the victim was a uniformed police officer. As we found in State v. Young, 476 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1985), “the district court here was unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the impermissible reasons [for departure] did not affect the departure sentence.” Id. at 162. Under these circumstances, Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla.1985) controls, and the district court here properly remanded the case for resentencing.
Baker challenges the holding that shooting a uniformed police officer is a valid reason for departure. We agree with the district court that
“[t]here is a special interest in affording protection to ... public servants who regularly must risk their lives in order to guard the safety of other persons and property.” Roberts v. Louisiana, 431 U.S. 633, 636 [97 S.Ct. 1993, 1995, 52 L.Ed.2d 637] (1977). Since, as can be seen, the protection of police officers is a valid societal objective which justifies legislation making police officers a special class of crime victims, we see no reason why a court may not validly pronounce as a reason for departing from sentencing guidelines that a defendant who chooses to make a police officer acting in the line of duty the victim of his crime is to be treated differently than a defendant who commits the same crime upon an ordinary citizen.
Baker, 466 So. 2d at 1146.
Accordingly, the decision of the district court is approved.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, OVERTON, McDonald, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (32 total)
-
Brown v. State, 538 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…onviction. As its reason for departure, the court stated that the victim in this case was a police officer on duty at the time of the commission of the offenses. Our supreme court has ruled that this is a valid reason for departure. State v. Baker, 483 So. 2d 423 (Fla.1986). Having reclassified the attempted manslaughter charge from a second degree felony to a first degree felony by reason of the defendant’s use of a firearm, the judgment on the firearm charge should have been vacated. Accordingly, we affirm…
-
Holden v. State, 487 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…CA 1986); Scott v. State, 482 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). The second time lethal force was used considers an essential element of the instant offense. This reason is also impermissible. Baker v. State, 466 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), aff'd, 483 So. 2d 423 (Fla.1986); Fletcher v. State, 457 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(11).1 The instant offense was second degree murder, under which the use of lethal force is a necessary element.2 The second reason for departure also classifi…
-
Reichman v. State, 497 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…and imposed a sentence of 25V2 years. Of the seven reasons for departure given by the trial court, we find only the last reason — that the victim of the offense of attempted murder was a law enforcement officer — to be of merit. See State v. Baker, 483 So. 2d 423 (Fla.1986). All the remaining reasons are invalid because they cite circumstances that have either been factored into the recommended range, were related to prior arrests without conviction, or fail the clear and convincing standard. Having found on…
Previewing 3 of 32 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- City OF Atl. Beach v. Bull, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985)
- Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985)
- Roberts v. Louisiana, 431 U.S. 633 (U.S. 1977)
- State v. Young, 476 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1985)
- Terence A. Baker v. State, 466 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Young v. State, 455 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)