JOSEPH R. RAGAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2008-01-31
No. 1D07-2728
WEBSTER, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
973 So. 2d 648 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2008) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Topics
Jury Finding Possession Of A Firearm Sentencing Enhancement Mandatory Minimum Sentence

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury Finding cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion. The appellant asserts that a three-year mandatory minimum sentence was improperly imposed pursuant to section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (1982), because there were no specific jury findings indicating the appellant personally possessed a firearm. The trial court failed to provide record attachments that conclusively refute the appellant’s claim that the jury verdict did not find that he actually possessed the firearm, as required to impose a three-year minimum mandatory sentence for commission of an offense with use of a firearm. See Knight v. State, 800 So. 2d 702, 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). No other claim was adequately pleaded. See Lauramore v. State, 949 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).

We, therefore, reverse the trial court’s order and remand for the court to attach records conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim of insufficient jury findings, or to resentence the appellant without the three-year minimum mandatory sentence.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.

WEBSTER, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Ragan v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)
    …da Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Ragan asserted that his two, consecutive forty- five-year sentences for armed robbery were illegal and that the trial court failed to properly resentence him pursuant to this court’s mandate in Ragan v. State, 973 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). The trial court determined that Ragan’s sentences were not illegal because the jury convicted him of armed robbery as a principal, and because when Ragan committed his offenses, armed robbery with a firearm was a first-degree fe…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw