BILLY DON DUNCAN, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1988-02-24
No. BP-193
JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
532 So. 2d 674 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1988) Caution
Cited by 8 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court's reasons for departing from the recommended sentencing guidelines were invalid, requiring reversal and remand for resentencing.


Headnotes

[1] The fact that a defendant entered a victim's home is an inherent component of burglary and cannot be used as a reason for departure from sentencing guidelines.

[2] Attempted sexual battery, if not resulting in a conviction, cannot be used as a reason for departure from sentencing guidelines.

Previewing 2 of 6 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

Facts & Procedural History

The defendant committed two separate home invasions, assaulting two women. He pleaded nolo contendere to burglary charges. The trial court departed fr…

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.


Opinion of the Court
SHIVERS, Judge.

SHIVERS, Judge.

The appellant/defendant appeals the trial court’s departure from the three year sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines. We reverse and remand for resentencing.

The facts contained in the record on appeal indicate that a householder was awakened at approximately 12:05 a.m. on August 12, 1985 by screams for help coming from the bedroom of his 69-year-old mother. He ran to the room to find appellant standing over his mother’s bed and threw appellant down the hallway. While the son was checking his mother’s condition, appellant left the house. The mother received two lacerations on her head, both requiring medical attention. Approximately fifteen minutes later, appellant entered a second home and found a woman sitting on the sofa watching television. Appellant hit the woman in the mouth with his fist, attempted to remove her shirt, and fondled her breasts.

Appellant entered pleas of nolo conten-dere to burglary of a dwelling in the first case and to burglary of a dwelling with assault in the second case. Despite a recommended guideline sentence of three years, the trial court imposed concurrent sentences of twenty years in the second case and fifteen years in the first case, giving the following written reasons for departure:

1.In each case, the defendant entered the victim’s home at night and attempted to brutally rape two women who were complete strangers to him, one of the victims 69 years of age.

2. The defendant physically attacked and beat both female victims, resulting in both physical and psychological trauma to both.

3. In both cases, minor children were present in the house at the time of the attacks. The children have suffered lasting psychological trauma as a result.

4. If any of the aforesaid reasons are found to be invalid, the court would impose the same sentence for each of the remaining valid reasons for departure.

Appellant argues on appeal that each of these reasons is invalid. Finding Reasons 1 and 3 to be invalid in full, and Reason 2 to be only partially valid, we reverse and remand for resentencing.

Reason 1 is invalid in several different respects.

First, the fact that appellant entered the victims’ homes is an inherent component of the offense of burglary of a dwelling and, as such, may not be used as a reason for departure. Scurry v. State, 489 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1986). See also Brown v. State, 511 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), and Williams v. State, 492 So. 2d 1308 (Fla.1986) (the fact that defendant entered the victim’s home at night while the victim was sleeping and, thus, vulnerable, was not a valid reason for departure).

Second, attempted sexual battery, even if supported by the record, constitutes a factor relating to the offense for which a conviction was not obtained and, therefore, may not be used as a reason for departure. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(ll); Scurry v. State, supra.

Third, although there are several cases in which departures based on age and vulnerability of the victim have been affirmed, age is an inappropriate reason for departure where, as here, there is no evidence that the victim was any more vulnerable than a younger or stronger person. Guzie v. State, 512 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).

The second reason stated by the trial court contains both valid and invalid components.

First, since the sentencing guideline scoresheet reflects ten points for physical victim injury, the use of physical injury as a reason for departure is improper. Scurry v. State, supra.

Second, this court has held that emotional trauma may be a valid reason for departure in a burglary case, since it is not a requisite element of the offense of burglary. Lawson v. State, 498 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Berry v. State, 511 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).

The record does contain evidence of emotional trauma to the woman in the first case, therefore constituting a valid reason for departure with respect to the burglary of a dwelling count. On the other hand, since emotional trauma is an inherent component of burglary with assault, Traver v. State, 502 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), any emotional trauma to the woman in the second case, to support a departure from the sentencing guidelines, would have to be based on extraordinary circumstances clearly not inherent in the offense. Casteel v. State, 498 So. 2d 1249 (Fla.1986). Since there is no evidence in the record of any emotional trauma to the woman in the second case, let alone trauma based on extraordinary circumstances, that portion of the second reason is invalid.

The third reason, like the first, is invalid in full. In Casteel v. State, supra, the supreme court held that either emotional trauma suffered by a child who witnessed a sexual assault on his mother or the mere fact that he witnessed the attack, constituted a valid reason for departure.

The record in this case contains no evidence that any children in the second house, although present in the house at the time of the incident, suffered any emotional trauma or that they even witnessed the crime. Likewise, although there is evidence in the first case that an eleven-year-old child was asleep in the room when the attack occurred, the record does not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the child actually witnessed the attack. State v. Mischler, 488 So. 2d 523 (Fla.1986).

Therefore, the third reason for departure is invalid.

Last, the “boiler plate” language used by the court in Reason 4 has been found not to satisfy the standard set out in Albritton v. State, 476 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1985). Griffis v. State, 509 So. 2d 1104 (Fla.1987). Since only a portion of Reason 2 is valid, and since the State has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that the court would have imposed the same sentence in the absence of the invalid reasons, we reverse and remand for resentencing. According to the supreme court’s recent decision in Shull v. Dugger, 515 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1987), the trial court may not enunciate new reasons for departure on remand.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Graham v. State, 557 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
    …court’s finding that the offense was committed in the same room and in close proximity to the victim’s sister. There being nothing of record to support such finding, such reason cannot be held to be a valid reason for departure. See Duncan v. State, 532 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). 2. The age of the victim, M.K, to wit: eight (8) years, and the fact that said child was vulnerable because of her age. This is not a proper reason for departure since the age of the victim is itself an inherent component of t…
  • Grant v. State, 586 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
    …ant committed these crimes was in furtherance of racial prejudice. As to reason one, there is no evidence that this particular victim was any more vulnerable to the crime of shooting into an occupied dwelling than any other person. Duncan v. State, 532 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Since the crime did not involve a physical confrontation and was committed at night while the victim was in bed, there is no evidence that the physical disabilities of the victim resulted in any greater vulnerability to this par…
  • Lovett v. State, 569 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
    …s for departure. Two of the trial court’s reasons — that the victim suffered traumatic pain and that the victim’s brother suffered emotional trauma in witnessing the event — are not supported by the record and are therefore invalid. Duncan v. State, 532 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Although the psychologist who treated the victim’s brother was present at the sentencing hearing, no testimony was taken of her or any other witness to establish that he had, in fact, suffered emotional trauma as a result of wha…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited (13 total)

View all 13 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw