EBONY MECHELLE JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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The court held that a sentencing court's reliance on outdated precedent requires remand for resentencing under current law.
Defendant was convicted and sought a downward departure sentence based on mental health issues. The trial court denied departure, relying on precedent…
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 Mental Health Issues cases and more on FLexlaw
Ebony Jones was convicted of burglary of a dwelling and criminal mischief. At sentencing, she requested a downward departure pursuant to section 921.00265(1), Florida Statutes (2010). At the sentencing hearing, Jones put on non-expert but unchallenged testimony that she has had mental health issues since her early teenage years and has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder. It was also presented that schizophrenia runs in her family.
The trial court did not consider this evidence, but not because he did not believe the testimony or that the testimony would not justify departure. The sentencing court’s failure to grant departure was his finding that this Court’s decision in State v. Mann, 866 So.2d 179 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), precluded any consideration of departure unless the defense first meets its burden of showing that appropriate treatment cannot be received in prison. This Court has now receded from Mann, see State v. Owens, 95 So.3d 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012), and no longer places this burden on the defendant.
. The State claims, perhaps correctly, that Jones failed to meet all of the technical requirements of the statute. But it seems to be of greater concern that the sentencing court relied on law since changed by this Court and which should be applied to this sentencing. It would be more just to remand for resentencing under the correct law to see if Jones can meet the test.
REVERSED and REMANDED for RESENTENCING.
GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mann, 866 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- State v. Owens, 95 So. 3d 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)