ALFONSO CASICA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2014-05-07
No. 4D11-2884
WARNER, MAY and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
138 So. 3d 1093 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2014)

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.

Synopsis

Appellant Casica challenges his designation as a dangerous sexual felony offender requiring a 25-year minimum mandatory term on his life sentence for armed sexual battery. The court affirmed the designation, holding that the jury's guilty verdict on the charged offense—which included the element that he used or threatened to use a firearm—satisfied constitutional requirements under Apprendi and Alleyne.


Holding

The trial court properly designated Casica as a dangerous sexual felony offender under section 794.0115(2)(b) because he used or threatened to use a deadly weapon during the crime. The jury's guilty verdict on the charged offense—which included the firearm element—satisfied the constitutional requirements of Apprendi and Alleyne that facts increasing mandatory minimum sentences be submitted to and found by the jury.


Headnotes

[1] A defendant may be properly designated as a dangerous sexual felony offender when a deadly weapon was used or threatened during the commission of the crime.

[2] A jury's finding of guilt on a charge that includes the use or threat of a deadly weapon satisfies the constitutional requirement that facts increasing a mandatory minimu…

Previewing 2 of 3 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

Key Quotes

“The trial court did not err because Casica was properly designated under section 794.0115(2)(b) in that he used or threatened to use a deadly weapon during the commission of the crime.”

Establishes the basis for the trial court's proper designation of appellant as a dangerous sexual felony offender.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Casica was convicted of sexual battery during which he used or threatened to use a deadly weapon, specifically a firearm. The information charged him …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges his designation as a dangerous sexual felony offender, the result of which was to require a twenty-five year minimum mandatory term on his life sentence for armed sexual battery, which he asserts was in violation of section 794.011(3), Florida Statutes (2005). The trial court did not err because Casica was properly designated under section 794.0115(2)(b) in that he used or threatened to use a deadly weapon during the commission of the crime.1 Because the jury found appellant guilty as charged in the information, and the information charged him with sexual battery during which the defendant “used or threatened *1094to use a deadly weapon, to wit: a firearm,” the jury made a finding sufficient to satisfy Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and Alleyne v. United States, — U.S. —, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013) (facts that increase the mandatory minimum sentence are elements that must be submitted to the jury). See Gentile v. State, 87 So.3d 55, 57-58 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). We reject appellant’s arguments to the contrary.

Affirmed.

WARNER, MAY and LEVINE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw