LEROY PLUMMER, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
Plummer's conviction for trafficking in hydrocodone was affirmed, but his sentence was reversed because the trial court lacked discretion to impose a sentence below the mandatory minimum of 15 years and $100,000 fine for the amount involved.
A trial court has no discretion to impose a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum for trafficking in hydrocodone when the amount falls within the specified range.
[1] A trial court lacks discretion to impose a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum and fine for trafficking in hydrocodone when the amount of the controlled substa…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeroy Plummer was convicted of trafficking in hydrocodone. The jury found the amount was over 14 grams and under 28 grams.…
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 Trafficking In Hydrocodone cases and more on FLexlaw
Leroy Plummer appeals his conviction and the state cross appeals his sentence for trafficking in hydrocodone. We find no error in Issue I. As to Issue II, although the trial court erred by excluding evidence of the confidential informant’s purported threats, see Crumley v. State, 534 So.2d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), Everett v. State, 801 So.2d 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), appellant failed to preserve the issue by proffering the excluded statements, Lucas v. State, 568 So.2d 18 (Fla.1990), Baker v. State, 71 So.3d 802 (Fla.2011).
We reverse appellant’s sentence, because the evidence was undisputed and the jury found that the amount of hydroco-done in the case was over 14 grams and under 28, which required a minimum mandatory sentence of 15 years and a fine of $100,000.00. § 893.135(l)(c)l.b, Fla. Stat. (2010). Nothing in the statute gave the trial court the discretion to impose a lower minimum mandatory and fine. See State v. Cuesta, 490 So.2d 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); State v. DeMille, 890 So.2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); State v. Delgado, 717 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Appellant conceded the trial court’s error on this point.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED.
PADOVANO, MARSTILLER, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Kena R. Mease, 200 So. 3d 161 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…ed to pay a fine of $100,000.” Interpreting see [*162] tion 893.135, our court, as well as every one of our sister courts, has concluded that the trial court lacks discretion to sentence a defendant below the mandatory minimum. See Plummer v. State, 121 So. 3d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); State v. DeMille, 890 So. 2d 454, 455 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); State v. Delgado, 717 So. 2d 1053, 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Lopez v. State, 555 So. 2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); State v. Row, 478 So. 2d 430, 431 (Fla. 5th D…
-
State v. Beaman (Fla. 1st DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Lucas v. State, 568 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1990)
- Baker v. State, 71 So. 3d 802 (Fla. 2011)
- State v. Cuesta, 490 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- State v. Delgado, 717 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Ricci Mayo v. State, 801 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Tierye William Crumley v. State, 534 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- State v. Demille, 890 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)