GERALD ROBERT-VERNON BOWLING
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Gerald Robert-Vernon Bowling was sentenced to 24 months in prison for felony petit theft with a criminal punishment code score of 20.6 points. The appellate court reversed his sentence, finding that the trial court erred in imposing prison without a jury finding of dangerousness, as required when the score falls below the 22-point threshold.
The trial court erred in sentencing Bowling to state prison without a jury finding of dangerousness given his score of 20.6 points, which is below the twenty-two-point threshold. The State failed to demonstrate the error was harmless, particularly where Bowling's sentencing points were close to the cutoff and he had committed prior offenses in 2000.
[1] A trial court errs in sentencing a defendant to state prison when their criminal punishment code score is less than twenty-two points and the jury did not make a finding…
[2] A sentencing error is not harmless when the defendant's sentencing points are close to the statutory cutoff and the defendant has prior offenses.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“He argues on appeal that the trial court erred in sentencing him to state prison when his criminal punishment code total was less than twenty-two points, and the jury did not make a finding of dangerousness. We agree and reverse.”
This establishes the core holding that sentencing to prison without a jury dangerousness finding violates Florida law when the punishment code score is below 22 points.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBowling was adjudicated guilty of felony petit theft and received a sentence of twenty-four months in state prison. His criminal punishment code score…
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 Felony Petit Theft cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Gerald Robert-Vernon Bowling appeals his sentence of twenty-four months in state prison imposed after being adjudicated guilty of felony petit theft. Mr. Bowling’s criminal punishment code scoresheet total was 20.6 points. He argues on appeal that the trial court erred in sentencing him to state prison when his criminal punishment code total was less than twenty-two points, and the jury did not make a finding of dangerousness. We agree and reverse. See Gaymon v. State, 288 So. 3d 1087, 1089–90 (Fla. 2020); Brown v. State, 260 So. 3d 147, 149 (Fla. 2018). We also find that the State failed to show the error was harmless where all but one of Appellant’s prior convictions
occurred in 2000. See Booker v. State, 244 So. 3d 1151, 1165–66 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (holding the error was not harmless where the defendant’s sentencing points were close to the twenty-two-point cutoff, and he had committed prior offenses), overruled on other grounds by Gaymon, 288 So. 3d at 1089. Therefore, we reverse Mr. Bowling’s sentence and remand the case for resentencing. On remand, the trial court is directed to empanel a jury to make the determination of dangerousness, if the State still seeks a finding of dangerousness under section 775.082(10), Florida Statutes. See Gaymon, 288 So. 3d at 1089– 90. REVERSED and REMANDED. WOLF, BILBREY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shields v. State, 296 So. 3d 967 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)…Florida court has explicitly addressed whether Brown governs in a sentencing after a probation revocation, both our supreme court and the Fourth District have applied Brown to such a sentencing without discussing the question. See Gaymon v. State, 288 So. 3d 1087, 1089-90 (Fla. 2020) (holding, in a case involving a sentencing after a revocation of probation, that the proper remedy under Brown is to remand for resentencing to a non-state prison sanction or to empanel a jury to make the dangerousness finding);…
-
Mohamed Donald v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)…emand to the circuit court “for resentencing with instructions to either impose a nonstate [prison] sanction of up to one year in county jail or empanel a jury to make the determination of dangerousness, if requested by the State.” Gaymon v. State, 288 So. 3d 1087, 1089–90 (Fla. 2020). Reversed and remanded with instructions. LEVINE, C.J., and ARTAU, J., concur.…
-
Klick v. State, 393 So. 3d 820 (Fla. 6th DCA 2024)…dangerousness under Section 775.082(10) is to remand with instructions to either impose a nonstate prison sanction or to empanel a jury to make the required dangerousness finding, if the State seeks that finding at the resentencing. Gaymon v. State, 288 So. 3d 1087, 1093 (Fla. 2020). Therefore, we reverse Defendant’s sentence and remand with that instruction. II. The correct dangerousness finding to be made. Defendant is also correct that the trial court erred when it determined that Defendant himself could…
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
- Booker v. State, 244 So. 3d 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
- Brown v. State, 260 So. 3d 147 (Fla. 2018)
- Keita Jermaine Gaymon v. State, 288 So. 3d 1087 (Fla. 2020)