STATE OF FLORIDA APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT LUCIAN WHITE, 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 State of Florida appealed a downward sentencing departure in a sexual abuse case, challenging a trial court's decision to reject a negotiated plea agreement and imposed sentence. The appellate court initially affirmed but, upon motion for rehearing, reversed and remanded, holding that a trial court cannot unilaterally depart from a sentencing agreement without affording the state the option to proceed to trial on all original counts.
A trial court cannot unilaterally depart from a sentencing agreement negotiated between the defendant and the state. If the trial court rejects the plea agreement, it must either impose the agreed sentence or afford the state the option to proceed to trial on all original counts filed against the defendant.
[1] A trial court cannot depart downward from a sentencing agreement between the state and the defendant without clear and convincing reasons.
[2] Reasons for a downward sentencing departure, such as the immaturity of the defendant or the forgiving attitude of the victim's mother, are invalid when they lack record s…
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 state cannot be unilaterally bound to an agreement which the trial court refuses to enforce against the defendant”
Establishes the core principle that trial courts cannot reject plea agreements without consequences for the state
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobert White was charged with sexual battery and lewd and lascivious assault against a ten-year-old victim in separate incidents on the same day. Whit…
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 Lewd And Lascivious Assault cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER, COBB and COWART, JJ., concur. COBB, Judge.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
The state has moved for rehearing in regard to our affirmance of its appeal of the sentence imposed by the trial court. The appellee, Robert White, was charged with sexual battery (Count I) and lewd and lascivious assault (Count II) allegedly perpetrated in separate incidents on the same day against a ten-year old female victim. White negotiated a plea agreement with the State whereby he would plead guilty to the lewd and lascivious assault count, the state would dismiss the sexual battery count, and, then, according to the record:
The defendant will be sentenced to two-and one-half years in the Department of Corrections. Incarceration will be followed by twelve years of supervised probation. The defendant will be sentenced in the third cell of Category 2 and the parties stipulate that penetration will be scored as victim injury. The defendant will receive counseling as part of his sentence.
The trial court accepted the plea with the understanding that the stipulated sentence applied only if it comported with the guidelines; otherwise, White would be sentenced “within the guidelines.” At the time of sentencing, however, the trial judge rejected both the guidelines and the negotiated agreement, which were in accord in requiring state prison time, and departed downward, placing White on community control for two years to be followed by ten years probation with payment of restitution for victim counseling. The trial court provided written reasons for departure:
Immaturity of Defendant — plus age Situation at the time of the offense
Relationship of the parties
Attitude of victim’s mother (very forgiving).
The state contends the trial court erred in departing downward from the recommended guidelines sentence without clear and convincing reasons for departure and in contravention of the sentencing agreement. The state is correct in both arguments. First, there is no record support for a finding that the defendant was immature for his age (18) at the time of the offense. See State v. Collins, 482 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); State v. Bentley, 475 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). The phrase “situation at the time of the offense” is meaningless. The “relationship of the parties” — a familial relationship — in no way mitigates a sexual assault. See Williams v. State, 462 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), rev. denied, 471 So. 2d 44 (Fla.1985). The “forgiving attitude” of the victim’s mother is irrelevant to determination of a proper sentence.
Not one reason for the downward departure was valid. But even if they had all been valid, we would still reverse the sentence on the authority of our opinion in State v. Leija, 520 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). In that case, which is directly on point herein, we reversed a downward departure sentence entered in contravention of a plea agreement between the defendant and the state. We remanded for entry of a sentence in accordance with the agreement or, in the alternative, for a trial on all counts filed below, including the one dismissed by the state as part of the agreement, in the event the trial court found the plea agreement unacceptable. In other words, the state cannot be unilaterally bound to an agreement which the trial court refuses to enforce against the defendant.
We originally affirmed this case based upon the appellee’s argument that, pursuant to the 1988 amendments to the sentencing guidelines, the trial court upon remand could now depart one cell downward without providing any written reasons. “Thus,” argued the appellee, “remanding this cause for resentencing would afford the [State] no relief.” Although we precip-itantly accepted this argument the first time around, we now reject it as specious because of the rationale of Leija. The trial court, based upon its agreement with the defendant and with the state, cannot depart from the agreed upon sentence. If the trial court rejects the agreement, it must afford the state the option to go to trial on both counts originally filed against the defendant White.
We grant rehearing, reverse the departure sentence, and remand pursuant to Lei-ja.
ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ussery, 543 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…la. 4th DCA 1976). In the instant case, it is clear that the crime occurred prior to the effective date of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.988(a) as amended, and the written reason for departure was invalid as a matter of law. State v. White, 532 So. 2d 1083, 1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Accordingly, the sentence as set forth by the trial court is reversed and remanded for the entry of a proper sentence. REVERSED AND REMANDED. DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.…
-
State v. McCULLOCH, 573 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…, the sentence must be reversed. If a trial court rejects a plea agreement, it must afford the state the option to go to trial on all counts originally filed against the defendant. State v. White, 554 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); State v. White, 532 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); State v. Leija, 520 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). The trial court failed to give the State that option in this case. Accordingly, we remand for entry of a sentence in accordance with the agreement or, in the alternative, for a…
-
State v. Hawkins, 225 So. 3d 943 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…volved were injured during the encounter. As to the first reason, we have held that a victim’s request for leniency is not a valid reason for a departure sentence. See, e.g., State v. Ussery, 543 So. 2d 457, 457 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); State v. White, 532 So. 2d 1083, -1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Accordingly, the officer’s recommendation for a nort-incarcerative sentence does not constitute a valid reason for departure. Similarly, the second reason for departure, i.e., no injury to the two, officers, is not a leg…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Purvis Lee Williams v. State, 462 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- State v. Collins, 482 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- State v. Bentley, 475 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- State v. Leija, 520 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)