ANTONIO B. ADDERLY, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Antonio Adderly, a youthful offender sentenced to ten years in prison for manslaughter with a firearm, successfully completed the Department of Corrections' boot camp program and petitioned for resentencing to probation. The court granted a writ of mandamus, holding that Florida Statute 958.045(5)(c) mandates resentencing to probation upon successful completion of boot camp.
The trial court has a clear legal duty to comply with Florida Statute 958.045(5)(c) by modifying Adderly's sentence to a term of probation following his satisfactory completion of the boot camp program. The statute mandates resentencing upon successful program completion and satisfactory performance report from the Department of Corrections.
[1] A trial court must resentence an offender to probation upon the offender's satisfactory completion of the "boot camp" program as authorized by statute.
[2] A writ of mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel a trial court to comply with a statutory mandate to modify a sentence upon completion of a "boot camp" program.
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“Upon the offender's completion of the basic training program, the department shall submit a report to the court that describes the offender's performance. If the offender's performance has been satisfactory, the court shall issue an order modifying the sentence imposed and placing the offender on probation.”
The mandatory statutory language requiring resentencing upon successful boot camp completion
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAdderly, age 16 at the time, pleaded nolo contendere to manslaughter with a firearm and was sentenced as an adult to ten years in prison followed by 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 Motion For Resentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
LAWSON, J.
Antonio B. Adderly seeks relief from an order denying his motion for resentencing filed pursuant to section 958.045(5)(c), Florida Statutes (2007). Because Adderly has successfully completed the Department of Correction’s, (“DOC”), “boot camp” program, section 958.045(5)(c) mandates that Adderly be resentenced to a term of probation. We treat Adderly’s filing as a petition for writ of mandamus, grant the writ, and remand with instructions that the trial court resentence Adderly in accordance with section 958.045(5)(c), Florida Statutes.
Adderly was originally charged with second-degree murder with a firearm. He entered a plea agreement with the State, pursuant to which he pled nolo contendere to the reduced charge of manslaughter with a firearm in exchange for a sentence of ten years in prison, followed by two years of supervised probation. Although Adderly was sixteen years old at the time of the plea, he was sentenced as an adult. The sentence was pronounced on January 25, 2001.
On July 11, 2006, the DOC sent a letter to the trial judge stating that Adderly qualified for its “basic training” (or “boot camp”) program, authorized by section 958.045, Florida Statutes, and requesting the judge’s approval for Adderly to participate in the program. On July 19, 2006, the trial judge responded by approving Adderly for the program. Thereafter, DOC placed Adderly in the program, which Adderly successfully completed on January 9, 2007.
On February 9, 2007, Adderly filed a motion for resentencing, seeking release to probation pursuant to section 958.045(5)(c), Florida Statutes. The statute provides in pertinent part:
Upon the offender’s completion of the basic training program, the department shall submit a report to the court that describes the offender’s performance. If the offender’s performance has been satisfactory, the court shall issue an order modifying the sentence imposed and placing the offender on probation.
(Emphasis added).
Because Adderly successfully completed DOC’s boot camp program, the trial court has a clear legal duty to comply with the provisions of this statute by modifying Ad-derly’s sentence to a term of probation. See, e.g., Sada v. State, 807 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Smith v. State, 750 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
We note that section 958.045(5)(c), Florida Statutes, was amended effective July 1, 2006, and now provides that a youthful offender who violates the probationary term imposed following successful completion of the boot camp program may be sentenced, upon revocation of the probation, to any sentence that could have originally been imposed on the charge. See Ch. 06-270, § 1, Laws of Fla. Prior to this statutory change, a defendant who violated probation after completing boot camp could only be sentenced to 364 days in jail. See, e.g., Fettler v. State, 885 So. 2d 411, 412 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (“It is well established in the courts of Florida that when a youthful offender successfully completes boot camp, he may not be sentenced to more than 364 days of incarceration upon a violation of the subsequent period of probation.”).1 WRIT GRANTED; REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS TO MODIFY SENTENCE.
ORFINGER and TORPY, JJ., concur. . Similar to Fettler, we have identified the following cases stating and applying the old rule, which has now been superseded by the amendment to section 958.045(5)(c), approved by chapter 06-270, Laws of Florida: Porter v. State, 940 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Eason v. State, 932 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Diaz v. State, 929 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Cutler v. State, 927 So. 2d 249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Claridy v. State, 911 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Green v. State, 902 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Holmes v. State, 899 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Lee v. State, 884 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Mims v. State, 871 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Blaxton v. State, 868 So. 2d 620, 621 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Mason v. State, 864 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Lawson v. State, 845 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Williams v. State, 841 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Thomas v. State, 825 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Burkett v. State, 816 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Geri v. State, 797 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); and Bloodworth v. State, 769 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lamore v. State, 86 So. 3d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…es.” Id. The State addressed Miller in its response and pointed out that, unlike La-more, Miller was designated a youthful offender upon his initial sentencing. The State argued that Lamore’s situation is more analogous to that of Adderly v. State, 958 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). In Adderly, the defendant, a minor, was sentenced on January 25, 2001, as an adult. Id. at 998. Only following a July 11, 2006, letter from the DOC recommending the defendant for boot camp was he designated as a youthful offende…
-
Reginald v. Davis, Jr., 16 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…5)(c), Florida Statutes, to youthful offender originally sentenced under earlier version of statute upon revocation of probation following successful completion of boot camp, violated ex post facto clause of Constitution); see also Adderly v. State, 958 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Fettler v. State, 885 So. 2d 411, 412 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). On rehearing, the State now asserts that Appellant never completed the [*997] boot camp program and filed an affidavit from a Department of Corrections official in supp…
-
Negron v. State, 90 So. 3d 948 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…a community residential program. If the offender violates the conditions of probation, the court may revoke probation and impose any sentence that it might have originally imposed as a condition of probation. (Emphasis added); see Adderly v. State, 958 So. 2d 997, 998 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (“Prior to this statutory change, a defendant who violated probation after completing boot camp could only be sentenced to 364 days in jail.”). Effective July 1, 2006, section 958.045(5)(c) was amended to permit a trial cou…
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 (22 total)
- Baron Ellis Bloodworth v. State, 769 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Thomas v. State, 825 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Blaxton v. State, 868 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Raymone LEE v. State, 884 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Mason v. State, 864 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Mims v. State, 871 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Lawson v. State, 845 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Jeromy Bautz v. State, 932 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Colin Earl Burkett v. State, 816 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Williams v. State, 841 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)