LONNIE MAYNARD PHELPS, 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.
Lonnie Phelps appealed his second-degree murder conviction and forty-year sentence for killing his wife. The court affirmed the conviction but reversed the departure sentence because the trial judge's reasons for exceeding guideline sentencing were insufficient under Florida law.
The court affirmed the conviction but reversed the departure sentence. The circumstances cited by the trial judge—the brutal manner of the killing and its effect on survivors—did not constitute valid grounds for departure from the guidelines because the evidence showed the victim was unaware of the attack and the mutilation occurred after death, not indicating excessive brutality during the killing.
[1] A trial court may depart from sentencing guidelines when the circumstances of the crime demonstrate excessive brutality and premeditation.
[2] Mutilation of a victim's body occurring subsequent to death does not constitute a clear and convincing reason for departing from sentencing guidelines based on excessive…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“This court has previously held that the circumstances of the way a crime was committed may constitute a clear and convincing reason for departure.”
Establishes the legal standard that manner of commission can justify guideline departure
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLonnie Phelps was convicted of the second-degree murder of his wife, Hazel Phelps. The victim was killed while lying helpless in bed, then beheaded, 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 Premeditation cases and more on FLexlaw
UPCHURCH, Judge.
Lonnie Phelps appeals a judgment and sentence for the second-degree murder of his wife. The trial judge departed from the sentencing guidelines and sentenced Phelps to forty years in prison. The recommended guideline sentence was twelve to seventeen years imprisonment. We affirm the judgment of conviction but reverse the departure sentence.
The trial court departed from the recommended guideline sentence based on the following written reasons:
I do find from the circumstances presented during the trial of this case that the victim, Hazel Phelps, the defendant’s wife, was apparently killed as she lay helpless in bed. She was beheaded, eviscerated, and her body was further mutilated. The headless body was later thrown into a trash dumpster. The manner in which this crime was committed and efforts to cover up this crime have caused the survivors of this victim to endure particularly horrendous mental anguish and grief.
This was a cruel, senseless killing with no pretense of justification of excuse.
I think that these are circumstances that do severely aggravate this particular crime.
This court has previously held that the circumstances of the way a crime was committed may constitute a clear and convincing reason for departure. Lerma v. State, 476 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In Lerma, the way the crime was committed indicated excessive brutality and premeditation. In the present case, however, there was nothing to indicate the crime was committed in an excessively brutal manner. There was no evidence of a struggle or that the victim was even aware of the impending attack. The mutilation of the body, while nauseating and perverted, apparently occurred subsequent to death and thus does not indicate the killing was excessively brutal.
Judgment affirmed; sentence vacated and cause remanded for for resentencing.
COBB, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lamond v. State, 500 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…n was for manslaughter with a firearm. Thus, under Holden and Hannah, the trial court’s first reason for departure is invalid. Appellant correctly contends also that the trial court’s second reason for departure is also invalid. In Phelps v. State, 490 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), this court held that where there was no evidence of a struggle and no evidence that the victim was aware of her impending attack while she lay helpless in her bed, the defendant’s killing of his wife was not excessively brutal s…
-
McCALL v. State, 503 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…to depart from the sentencing guidelines based upon a crime for which a conviction has not been obtained. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(11). Moreover, we have held that mutilation of a dead body does not constitute excessive brutality. Phelps v. State, 490 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 500 So. 2d 545 (Fla.1986). Here, the evidence indicates the victim was rendered unconscious, if not killed, by the first blow to his head; certainly there was no clear and convincing evidence that he was alive or consc…
Authorities Cited
- Lerma v. State, 476 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)