STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
STEPHEN I. HENDERSON, 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 appeals Henderson's downward departure sentence. The trial court relied on two reasons for the departure—a plea bargain and substantial assistance to law enforcement—neither of which was supported by competent substantial evidence in the record. The court reversed and remanded for resentencing.
The trial court's downward departure sentence was not supported by competent substantial evidence. The plea was not negotiated, and while Henderson may have provided assistance to law enforcement, the record contained no testimony demonstrating this, and the parties were not afforded the opportunity to present evidence or challenge the claim.
[1] A trial court must impose a guidelines sentence unless the court finds that the evidence supports a valid reason for a departure sentence.
[2] A downward departure sentence from the sentencing guidelines must be supported by competent substantial evidence in the record.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“a trial court must impose a guidelines sentence unless the court finds that the evidence supports a valid reason for a departure sentence”
Establishes the legal standard for departures 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 intelligenceHenderson was sentenced on September 29, 1998. The trial court stated Henderson had entered a negotiated plea, but both the assistant state attorney a…
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 Downward Departure Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
DAVIS, Judge.
The State challenges Stephen I. Henderson’s downward departure sentence. In its written order, the trial court provided two reasons for its departure: (1) Henderson entered a legitimate uncoerced plea bargain; and (2) Henderson provided substantial assistance to law enforcement. The State argues that neither reason is supported by the record. We agree. Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand to the trial court to conduct a new sentencing hearing.
At the outset, we note that “[a] trial court must impose a guidelines sentence unless the court finds that the evidence supports a valid reason for a departure sentence.” State v. Barnes, 753 So. 2d 605, 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (citing Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.701(d)). When a trial court imposes a sentence that departs downward from the sentencing guidelines, that departure must be supported by competent substantial evidence. See Barnes, 753 So. 2d at 607 (citing State v. Bostick, 715 So. 2d 298, 299 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)).
At the sentencing hearing on September 29, 1998, the trial court began its hearing by stating that Henderson had entered a negotiated plea. Both the assistant state attorney and Henderson’s counsel corrected the trial court’s statement and agreed that the plea was “straight up.” Additionally, the trial court stated that Henderson had provided substantial assistance to law enforcement. However, the record does not contain any testimony to support this statement. Rather, the record shows that the trial judge advised the parties that he had met privately with the detective investigating the case, and that the detective told him of Henderson’s assistance.
Although Henderson may have, in fact, given substantial assistance to law enforcement, the record does not contain testimony demonstrating this to be true. The trial court did not provide Henderson the opportunity to present such testimony, nor was the State given the opportunity to challenge such a contention. The trial judge erred by relying on information a sentencing witness gave to him off the record in a private conversation.
Since neither of the trial court’s reasons for the downward departure is supported by the record, we vacate Henderson’s sentence and remand this case for a new sentencing hearing.
Reversed and remanded.
FULMER, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Tyrrell, 807 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…ose the lowest permissible sentence calculated according to the Criminal Punishment Code unless the court finds that the evidence supports a valid reason for a downward departure. See e.g., § 921.002(1)© & (3), Fla. Stat. (1999); State v. Henderson, 766 So. 2d 389, 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). The decision to depart from the minimum sentence mandated by the Criminal Punishment Code is a two-part process. Banks v. State, 732 So. 2d 1066 (Fla.1999); State v. Schillaci, 767 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). First, the…
-
State v. Stephenson, 973 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…ern is sufficiently specific to inform the court of the perceived error. State v. Paulk, 813 So. 2d 152, 154 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (citing Williams v. State, 414 So. 2d 509 (Fla.1982)). We conclude the State satisfied that standard. State v. Henderson, 766 So. 2d 389, 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). In State v. Tyrrell, 807 So. 2d 122, 125 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), this Court recognized the specific limitations placed on a trial court’s authority to depart from the Criminal Punishment Code, explaining: At a minimum, the tr…1 / 2
-
State v. McKNIGHT, 35 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…e the lowest permissible sentence calculated according to the Criminal Punishment Code unless the court finds that the evidence supports a valid reason for a downward departure. See e.g., § 921.002(1)(f) & (3), Fla. Stat. (1999); State v. Henderson, 766 So. 2d 389, 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Section 921.0026(2) sets forth the circumstances under which a departure from the lowest permissible sentence is reasonably justified. The statutory list of mitigating factors is not exclusive and the trial court may impose…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Barnes, 753 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- State v. Bostick, 715 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)