JAMES LEFRESNE, 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.
The court held that the reasons provided for departing from the sentencing guidelines were invalid, requiring resentencing.
The defendant was sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment, exceeding the recommended guidelines range of nine to twelve years. The trial judge cited t…
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
HALL, Judge.
James LeFresne appeals his judgment and sentence for sexual battery. We only find merit in his argument regarding his sentence.
The appellant’s guidelines scoresheet placed the appellant in the recommended sentencing range of nine to twelve years’ imprisonment. The trial judge sentenced the appellant to twenty years’ imprisonment. He provided the following written reasons in support of the departure:
1. That the victim in the matter was an eighty-seven (87) year old female who lived alone and was unusually vulnerable to such type of attack [citations omitted].
2. That the victim was a female, the Defendant was a male and the crime occurred at night [citations omitted].
Regarding the first reason, it is invalid because there is no showing that as a result of her advanced age the victim suffered more than a younger person would have. See Brown v. State, 483 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Byrd v. State, 516 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).
Regarding the second reason, the gender of a victim in and of itself is not a valid reason for departure. Mathis v. State, 515 So. 2d 214 (Fla.1987). Furthermore, the components of this second reason are common to sexual batteries.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment but reverse the appellant’s sentence and remand for resentencing within the guidelines.
RYDER, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pope v. State, 561 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 1990)…BARKETT, Justice. We have for review Pope v. State, 542 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), based upon express and direct conflict with Crigler v. State, 526 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and numerous other decisions of the district courts.1 We quash the district court’s decision in Pope and approve the decision in Crigler. Pope was found guilty of violating community control. The recommended guidelines sentence,…1 / 2
-
Wemett v. State, 567 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 1990)…this case. . We note that the district courts in many opinions have addressed the issue of departure from the guidelines due to a victim’s age-related vulnerability. See, e.g., Graham v. State, 557 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); LeFresne v. State, 526 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Bell v. State, 522 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Byrd v. State, 516 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Moore v. State, 468 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). The weight of authority supports the conclusion we reach today.…
-
Manuel v. State, 542 So. 2d 1368 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…idelines. See Hankey v. State, 485 So. 2d 827 (Fla.1986). As to the first reason for departure, this court has held that a victim’s age and vulnerability are not proper reasons to deviate from the recommended guidelines sentence. LeFresne v. State, 526 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). The fourth district has recognized, however, that the advanced age of the victim plus some additional element, such as the fact that the defendant stood in a position of trust with the victims, will justify such departure. Byrd v…
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
- Mathis v. State, 515 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 1987)
- Bondurant v. Nickolas P. Geeker, 515 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 1987)
- Byrd v. State, 516 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Buchanan v. State, 483 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)