LAWRENCE GRANT, 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.
Lawrence Grant appealed his conviction and 25-year sentence for robberies of an elderly widow. The trial court departed upward from the sentencing guidelines (9-17 years) based on seven reasons, which the appellate court largely upheld as valid grounds for departure, affirming the sentence.
The court affirmed the 25-year sentence, finding six of the seven stated reasons for departure to be clear and convincing valid reasons. The court held that the victim's extreme vulnerability due to advanced age and helpless condition, the emotional trauma exceeding that normally associated with robbery, the defendant's breach of trust, and the repeated victimization all constituted valid grounds for departure from the guidelines.
[1] A victim's extreme vulnerability due to advanced age and helpless condition is a valid reason for departing from sentencing guidelines.
[2] Emotional hardship on a victim, including trauma greater than that usually associated with a robbery, can support a departure from sentencing guidelines.
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 fact that the victim was particularly vulnerable due to her advanced age and helpless condition is a valid reason for departure.”
Establishes that victim vulnerability is a clear and convincing reason for upward departure from sentencing guidelines
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGrant, who had previously done yard work for Mrs. Ethel Haines, an 87-year-old widow living alone, robbed her at gunpoint with a sawed-off rifle on Ju…
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 Victim Vulnerability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals his conviction and sentence, which we affirm. The guidelines scoresheet indicated a recommended range of nine to twelve years escalated to twelve to seventeen years by virtue of appellant’s violation of probation. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(14). The trial court departed from the sentencing guidelines and imposed a twenty-five-year sentence in the matter. In so doing, the court entered a written order delineating seven reasons for departure:
1. The victim, Mrs. Ethel Haines, was an eighty-seven year old widow who lived at home alone. Because of her age and condition, as viewed by this Court during her trial testimony, she was extremely vulnerable and helpless. See Davis v. State, 458 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th D.C.A.1984).
2. In fact, this traumatic experience has caused her to sell her home and live with her daughter-in-law in Ohio. 3. The Defendant, who had done yard work for Mrs. Haines in the past, gained her trust and then, aware of her age, condition and situation, he committed these crimes upon her. 4. The Defendant not only terrorized Mrs. Haines on July 10, 1984 with the sawed-off rifle, but he returned only two days later and robbed her again. See Manning v. State, 452 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 1st D.C.A.1984).
5. The Defendant threatened Mrs. Haines not to call the police or tell anyone. However, out of fear and desparation [sic] she called her son after the second robbery and pleaded for him to fly down and get her, but she wouldn’t say why. Not until her son and daughter contacted the police themselves would she tell what had happened to her. 6. All of these facts corroborate the extreme vulnerability of the victim and the Defendant’s disregard for that vulnerability.
7. Finally, the Defendant’s truthfulness is extremely questionable, e.g. 1) that the sawed-off rifle, which was identified by Mrs. Haines and Williams’s rule witness Mrs. Grace Warner after it was found in the Defendant’s truck, was stolen from him several years prior to the robberies, and 2) that, with respect to his four prior felony convictions, he thought at the time that he was pleading not guilty instead of no contest.
We find reasons 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 to be “clear and convincing” valid reasons for departure. The fact that the victim was particularly vulnerable due to her advanced age and helpless condition is a valid reason for departure. Harris v. State, 482 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Furthermore, the facts dictate that the emotional hardship on the victim support departure in this instance. Hankey v. State, 485 So. 2d 827 (Fla.1986). Even though fear or emotional trauma are inherent components of the crime of robbery, they were a proper basis for departing from the guidelines in the case sub judice because the victim’s trauma was greater than that usually associated with a “simple robbery.” Campos v. State, 488 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Davis v. State, 458 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), decision approved, 477 So. 2d 565 (Fla.1985); cf. Knowlton v. State, 466 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 476 So. 2d 675 (Fla.1985). The psychological trauma arose from extraordinary circumstances. See Casteel v. State, 498 So. 2d 1249 (Fla.1986). The defendant not only terrorized the victim with a sawed-off rifle on one occasion; he also returned two days later and robbed her again. Breach of trust constitutes a clear and convincing reason to justify departure in this instance, as well. Hankey v. State, 485 So. 2d 827 (Fla.1986); Davis v. State, 489 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Steiner v. State, 469 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 479 So. 118 (Fla.1985). The remaining reason for departure, lack of truthfulness, is invalid. Mischler v. State, 458 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), aff'd, 488 So. 2d 523 (Fla.1986). Having found all the cited reasons, but one, as clear and convincing reasons for departure, it must be shown by the State beyond a reasonable doubt that the absence of the invalid reason would not have affected the departure sentence. Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla.1985). We find that the reasonable doubt standard has been met and therefore affirm.
AFFIRMED.
HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wemett v. State, 567 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 1990)…ing reasons for upward departure from the sentencing guidelines.”); Guzie v. State, 512 So. 2d 289, 290 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (“no showing that the victim here was any more vulnerable than a person who may be younger and/or stronger”); Grant v. State, 510 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (age and vulnerability, in light of psychological trauma and breach of trust by defendant, justified departure); Hadley v. State, 488 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (elderly victim, physical attack, verbal abuse causing psycholog…
-
ABT v. State, 528 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…(sic) at night, Mather [Mathis] v State, 498 So2d [647] 648, whose aim was not to steal but to take by armed force, under disguise, properties of helpless victims, Davis v State, 458 So2d 42 [Fla. 4th DCA 1984], Grant v State, 85-91 4th DCA 1-7-87 [510 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)], who were approached and attacked while asleep, Allen v State, 86-1650 4th DCA 4-15-87 [522 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)]. 3. The terror this person committed on the victims was not inherent in the components of these crimes,…
-
Harris v. State, 509 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…rict [in Tompkins v. State, 483 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1986) ] that, in order to constitute a valid reason for departure, the record must demonstrate that the victim of the kidnapping suffered unusual trauma. Id., at 134. See also Grant v. State, 510 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 16,1987) (fear [*1301] and emotional trauma, even though inherent components of the crime of robbery, held a proper basis for upward departure because victim’s trauma was greater than that usually associated with a single robbery)…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (14 total)
- State v. Mischler, 488 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1986)
- City OF Atl. Beach v. Bull, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985)
- Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985)
- Casteel v. State, 498 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. 1986)
- Hankey v. State, 485 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 1986)
- Davis v. State, 458 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Mischler v. State, 458 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Steiner v. State, 469 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Manning v. State, 452 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Knowlton v. State, 466 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)