STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CARLOS STEPHENS, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed a downward departure sentence because the State failed to preserve the issue by not objecting at sentencing, rendering the appellate challenge procedurally barred.
When the State fails to object to a downward departure sentence at sentencing or file a Rule 3.800(b) motion, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review.
[1] A downward departure sentence challenge is unpreserved for appellate review when the State fails to object at sentencing or file a Rule 3.800(b) motion to correct sentenc…
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 intelligenceCarlos Stephens received a downward departure sentence. Although the State opposed the motion for downward departure below, it did not enter an object…
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
The State seeks review of the trial court’s downward departure sentence arguing that the downward departure sentence given Carlos Stephens, appellee, is contrary to section 921.0026(1), Florida Statutes (2011) (“A downward departure from the lowest permissible sentence, as calculated according to the total sentence points pursuant to s. 921.0024, is prohibited unless there are circumstances or factors that reasonably justify the downward departure.”).
Although below the State argued in opposition to the appellee’s motion for a downward departure sentence, the State did not enter an objection to the downward departure sentence. When the State has failed to enter an objection, general or otherwise, to a downward departure sentence, Florida courts have found the issue unpreserved for appellate review. See State v. Swilley, 73 So.3d 822, 822-23 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (finding assertion of error in downward departure sentence was not preserved for appellate review where the State never objected to imposition of the downward departure sentence); see also Douglas v. State, 913 So.2d 1234, 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (appellate court declined to review claim of error in downward departure sentence because issue was unpreserved when the State neither objected to downward departure at sentencing, nor filed a Rule 3.800(b) motion to correct sentence).
Accordingly, we find any error here was not preserved for appellate review and AFFIRM.
VAN NORTWICK, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur, ROWE, J„ concurs in result.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Dep't OF Transp. v. Dorthy Schwefringhaus, 188 So. 3d 840 (Fla. 2016)…QUINCE, J. This case is before the Court for review of the. decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in Department of Transportation v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 128 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). In its decision, the district court ruled upon the following questions, which the court certified to be of great public importance: IS DOT BOUND BY A RAILROAD CROSSING AGREEMENT UNDER WHICH IT RECEIVED A REVOCABLE LICENSE TO USE…1 / 2
-
State v. Adrea Vernique Wiley, 210 So. 3d 658 (Fla. 2017)…ar disorder. Id. at 481-82. “At the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor argued against a downward departure [*659] sentence, both generally and with specificity.” Id. at 482 (footnote omitted). However, relying on its decision in State v. Stephens, 128 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), the First District ruled that, “[although the prosecutor’s argument clearly put the trial court on notice of the State’s opposition to a downward departure sentence, it was not sufficient ... to preserve the issue for appellate…
-
State v. Adrea Vernique Wiley, 179 So. 3d 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…tate’s opposition to a downward departure sentence, it was not sufficient under this court’s precedent to preserve the issue for appellate review because the prosecutor did not also object to the sentence after it was imposed. See State v. Stephens, 128 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“Although below the State argued in opposition to the appellee’s motion for a downward departure sentence, the State did not enter an objection to the downward departure sentence. When the State has failed to enter an objection,…
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
- Douglas v. State, 913 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- State v. Desmond L. Swilley, 73 So. 3d 822 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)